<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama Expands Lead in Polls But Clinton Believes the Voters Don&#8217;t Count</title>
	<atom:link href="http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2920" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=2920</link>
	<description>Defending Liberty and Enlightened Thought</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:14:39 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ron Chusid</title>
		<link>http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=2920&#038;cpage=1#comment-179205</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Chusid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 04:09:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=2920#comment-179205</guid>
		<description>Not only was Obama not on the ballot, but write in votes for him were not counted in Michigan. 

Holding a new vote would be best but I doubt its going to happen, at least in Michigan. The word I hear is that the chairman of the state party is very strongly pro Clinton and has been shouting down anyone who has protested the situation.

If there isn&#039;t a new vote, the best alternative might be to let Florida and Michigan have a delegation at the convention (to avoid the appearance of voters in these states of being ignored) but give an equal number of delegates to both Obama and Clinton. That way the delegations would have no bearing on the outcome of the nomination battle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only was Obama not on the ballot, but write in votes for him were not counted in Michigan. </p>
<p>Holding a new vote would be best but I doubt its going to happen, at least in Michigan. The word I hear is that the chairman of the state party is very strongly pro Clinton and has been shouting down anyone who has protested the situation.</p>
<p>If there isn&#8217;t a new vote, the best alternative might be to let Florida and Michigan have a delegation at the convention (to avoid the appearance of voters in these states of being ignored) but give an equal number of delegates to both Obama and Clinton. That way the delegations would have no bearing on the outcome of the nomination battle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Drissel</title>
		<link>http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=2920&#038;cpage=1#comment-179178</link>
		<dc:creator>David Drissel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 02:03:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=2920#comment-179178</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s hope that the Florida and Michigan delegates are indeed not counted at the convention.  It would be blatantly unfair to count those delegates now, especially since Obama followed DNC rules and acted in good faith when he did not campaign in those two states. Besides, the voters of those states did not have a real choice in their respective elections, with Obama&#039;s name not even on the ballot in Michigan.  To change the rules in the middle of the game would be dishonest and likely generate a major party schism.  The Clinton Machine&#039;s Machiavellian tactics never cease to amaze me, as they seem to be pushing for that very scenario.  The only fair compromise would be to hold new caucuses in those two states prior to the convention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s hope that the Florida and Michigan delegates are indeed not counted at the convention.  It would be blatantly unfair to count those delegates now, especially since Obama followed DNC rules and acted in good faith when he did not campaign in those two states. Besides, the voters of those states did not have a real choice in their respective elections, with Obama&#8217;s name not even on the ballot in Michigan.  To change the rules in the middle of the game would be dishonest and likely generate a major party schism.  The Clinton Machine&#8217;s Machiavellian tactics never cease to amaze me, as they seem to be pushing for that very scenario.  The only fair compromise would be to hold new caucuses in those two states prior to the convention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
