User talk:67.162.143.161

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please stop your campaign to erase evidence of Superdelegates who are voting for Clinton despite their districts voting for Obama. You've done it more than once, and objectivity and relevance is clearly not your motive. If you want fairness and objectivity you would leave these entries alone and also add similar entries to Obama superdelegates who's districts voted for Clinton.

No, actually I wouldn't add similar entries to Obama superdelegate biographies because the vote percentages of district, state, precinct, etc. have no bearing on how a Superdelegate casts his or her vote. If you don't understand this, please re-read the Wikipedia Superdelegate article.

If you keep up your current shenanigans, I will act to have your IP blocked, and traced. If you happen to have made these alterations from an official computer that is in an office allied with Hillary, or Waters, or Richardson, I will be sure the media finds out. You don't want that kind of press.

I don't work for any of the people from whose biographies I've removed your irrelevant, politically motivated statements. However, if you'd like to "make sure the media finds out" that some chick in Colorado understands the Democratic Party's delegate selection process better than you do, go a head and send out a press release.

Again, the way to tackle this issue with integrity and objectivity is to ensure every superdelegate's pledged vote is noted, along with whether or not the vote contradicts the vote of the superdelegate's constituents.

No, that would be the way to "tackle this issue" a complete lack of understanding of the Democratic Party's delegate selection process.
Please explain why you have only edited information on superdelegates for hillary. Please explain why information regarding superdelegates who are contradicting the votes of their districts is irrelevant. Please explain why if this such an irrelevant argument, the national media is repeatedly mentioning these contradictions (bill richardson's vote for obama was a hot topic recently, a new mexico went to hillary). In your responses to my argument, you dodged that question entirely and simply branded the entire issue as irrelevant. That's entirely unfair. Again, the issue of superdelegates is HUGE in the national press, whether or not you feel it is procedurally irrelevant is, well, irrelevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.78.77 (talk) 17:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 04:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)