Quote:
Originally Posted by VinylBoy  Gotta side with playainda336 on this one...
To bring up another advertising example to the table, one of the big culprits of it is Geico. They do several nationwide spots for their car & motorcycle insurance on practically all the networks. Yet, if you tried to buy their insurance in New York they won't sell it to you. If amhersthungboi's logic is correct, Geico should be punished for advertising their services in an area that is also ineligible.
The same way Hillary shouldn't be punished about not taking her name off the ballot, the same goes for Obama for one of his ads airing. They probably paid some major distributor to air his spots on a national level during his campaign, and neither person was expecting Florida & Michigan to jump the gun and do their primaries early. Then again, who could have ever predicted that would of happened to begin with? |
If Obama's Political Ad was a National Ad that was bought before this issue with Florida occurred then he should have canceled the entire ad. If Obama wanted to abide by the pledge and therefore not campaign then he can't run the ad regardless of cost or anything else. Sometimes life is tough and we have to make hard decisions.
There is no punishment for not removing names from the ballot because it was not apart of any DNC rules and certainly not apart of the Four State Pledge. It was the choice of the Candidates to remove their names from the ballots...those who understand politics realize it was a political power play.
Finally, Both camps have accused eachother of campaigning in Florida. Obama's Political Ad was a violation. Hillary going to FL after the Primary was not. If Obama continues to claim "sticking to the rules" and "sticking to a signed pledge" then he is only highlighting his errors in judgement and failures to play by the rules and to meet the requirements of what he claims the pledge meant.