I don’t think that there are many Democrats who theoretically believe that Florida and Michigan should not be counted. Some (like Bill Clinton on Rush Limbaugh’s show) argue that Florida and Michigan should count "as is," but that hardly qualifies as fair considering that both candidates were not on the ballot in Michigan. Others are arguing that the Clinton and Obama campaigns "agreed to the rules" and thus the votes in these respective states don’t count, but the people who matter — the voters of Florida and Michigan — certainly didn’t agree to it.
If we really believe all that stuff we said in 2000, that every vote does count, it’s vital to find a way to give everyone a chance to cast one.
I think we were all hoping that the race would be decided by now and that the two states could be seated as-is without affecting the final outcome, but that didn’t happen. And as Howard Dean reminds us, having Florida and Michigan submit proposals for a re-vote of some kind is well within "the rules." Both Governor Granholm and Governor Crist say they are in favor of a re-vote, so the question becomes — who’s going to pay for it?
According to the DNC, a re-vote — estimated to cost $20 million — can be paid for with soft money. So why don’t the foundations committed to promoting democracy around the world — Ford, Pew, Open Society etc. — step up and foot the bill here in the US?
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Jane!
I’ll donate to it.
Good question. Of course promoting democracy abroad is what the corporations are about. At home, maybe notsomuch.
GM and Disney should foot the bill
What Jane said. Pocket change for the foundations and the billionaires who care about democracy.
Let them pay.
I run the election for 15 million~!
Let me preface this by saying that I’d MUCH rather be talking about sex.
Maybe I’m a hard-ass, but I think that the states of Florida and Michigan should pay for it. It was their dumb-ass legislatures that got them into this mess to begin with. So I think that they should have to pay for it. Otherwise, there’s no disincentive to prevent something like this from happening next time around.
How about Florida and Michigan pay, since they were the ones who decided to move their primaries? Either that or their delegates can sit out the convention. Man, it’s like the rules weren’t clear or something…
Do I recall seeing something about Florida’s moving up of it’s primary was run through by Republicans?
Dang it!
I hate my CRS sometimes!
If both States were seated “as is” with Obama getting the undecided in MI, would anything change as far as his lead in delegates?
Let’s see you print up ballots, maybe 3 or 4 million, one for each registered dem.
You buy some big card board boxes and cut slits in them.
You arrange to deliver them to schools
You announce the day and time of the vote.
You collect the ballot boxes.
rocket science no?
You hire high school kids to count them.
If Florida and/or Michigan are going to be participating, I would think that ‘fairness’ dictates that the delegates be apportioned equally between the two candidates, and thereby saving the political dollars for future events. The alternative is that Floridians and Michiganlanders foot the cost for their re-vote. As for the non-profits stepping up to absord the cost is a non-starter.
Jaango
Maybe the lawmakers who pushed for an early election DESPITE being told by the DNC that these delegates won’t be seated should pay.
They were the ones who wanted an early election at the cost of their state not having any say. They pushed for it. Their constituency had little say in it, and lost their votes. Those legislators should be the ones paying.
They should pay for fucking up an election. Then, after finding out how close of a race it was, trying to renig on the deal. The whole thing stinks.
I am surprised Jane didn’t title this post “Pew Alert”..)
Didn’t NJ Gov Corzine say he’d pay for half of it? Thought I heard that today.
Correction for you, Jane.
Actually, Clinton WAS on the Michigan ballot…Obama and Edwards were not.
Vote counts from Michigan
Clinton 328,309
Dodd 3,845
Gravel 2,361
Kucinich 21,715
Uncommitted 238,168
Total 594,398
Correction for myself…
Guess that Jane’s post could be read a different way. I thought she meant that both were off the ballot, though I guess she meant that not both candidates were on the ballot. Sorry!
Yeah, Corzine & Rendell (PA) will raise money for half.
http://gothamist.com/2008/03/1…..orti_1.php
Bravo to Howard Dean for trying to bring some discipline to the Party. We’re always complaining how we can’t be as cohesive the Repubs, and that’s what I think Howard was trying to do by being such a hardass about “the rules.”
I heard Ed Shultz today saying the FL thing started with the Dems in the legislature, and I’ve seen this elsewhere. They tried to back track, but the FL Repubs started to realize how this could hurt Dems and made sure the date change went through. The MI problem was created by the state’s Dem “leadership.”
Each state’s Dem voters to need organize for different leaders and all anger should be directed at those who tried to break the rules. Howard Dean is not the problem here.
I wrote Dr. Dean this morning to say “set up the fund – bet we can raise the damn money in 24 hours”… put all this silly nonsense to bed once and for all…
Can anyone point me to a place that explains who was in charge of setting the primary dates in FL and MI? I think I know how Florida happened in the context of a larger election bill… But I haven’t heard, or looked for frankly, a good explanation of how it happened in MI. Thanks.
T-
Here’s another link to Corzine & voterover.
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/…..038;coll=1
We burn through $20 million in 1 hour and 15 minutes in Iraq. So, in the great scheme of things, it isn’t all that much money.
If you want any kind of real security, that isn’t nearly adequate, you know that, don’t you? You’ve just quantified one of the most stealable elections ever.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign has offered several times over the last few days to raise funds for half of the cost, asking Obama’s campaign to make the same pledge. Obama’s side has so far refused. Mostly because they would appear to prefer that Florida and Michigan voters be left out completely. This reflects badly on the whole “let the voters decide” meme Obama’s supporters have been spouting. But, not the voters from thwo of the most populous states. States we cannot possibly win the presidency without.
Now it is all about the RULZ. But only when the rules work one way. It seems like there are some short memories here. Three other states (NH, NV and SC) moved their primaries up and were not penalized in any way.
In fact I remember reading on all the big blogs that “of Course the delegates from those states will be seated.” Now, not so much. Dean has screwed this up royally. And anyone as freakishly biased as Danna Brazille has no business making up the RULZ. If those votes are not counted, we can kiss the GE goodbye.
As a Florida Democrat, this talk of a re-vote is insanity. Spending money in June that could be better spent in a campaign against McCain? Stupid, Stupid, Stupid. Please do not tell me about all of the voters who came to the polls in January; it was not solely because of the Primary, but rather because of an important amendment/proposition to cure the property tax crisis here in Florida. That is what brought voters to the polls. Moreover, many people intentionally did not vote in the primary, even though voting on the tax issue, because they knew they primary did not count and was simply a beuty contest. Either split the votes between Clinton and Obama, or simply seat the delegates but not let them vote on selecting a Presidential candidate. (Let them vote on the platform. LOL).
What if Hillary was out of the race? Would Michigan delegates still demand to be seated? Considering Hillary didn’t win that state, but uncommitted did, maybe they could send Hillary’s delegates to the convention, and send the others as well, but the must vote for someone else besides Hillary, since by definition, the voters didn’t chose her.
Florida is similar. Hillary gets hers, Obama gets his, etc.
Obama should start chanting about the uncommitted in MI, those committed to vote for someone besides Hillary.
Last I heard, a mail-in vote cost about five million dollars in each state. That sounds like Carter Center, Pew, Ford, and a couple other good-government types could foot the bill in each state.
No to the DNC, no to the state taxpayers, no to the campaigns.
Just mail every eligible voter (closed: Democrat; open: all voters) a ballot and tell them to vote and return it right away. Set a deadline. Count quickly. Put this away so TradMed can stop singing “Dems in Disarray”
Who made the ultimate decisions to hold the primaries early? Oddly, I’ve never even heard that question asked.
That’s who should pay. The consequences were made clear from the start.
The Rs punished FL, MI, SC, and NH half of their delegates for moving thier primaries outside the R window. NV was not a primary so no punishment.
SC voted within the allowed window set by the Dems. NH was not punished as their state law requiring it to be the first primary was always known and not a recent add-on to the mess
#24 was in reply to SanderO. If the state party rammed this through, then the state party should have to foot the bill. I live in Michigan and I am sick of Gennifer Granholm’s insistence on pushing this primary ahead against the national party’s rules. The people of the state don’t deserve to not have their votes counted, but she really deserves to have a substantial amount of the cost of this taken out of her pocket, and so do the state party stiffs who did this. They were told explicitly not to do this, and they were stupid enough to do it anyway. What a bunch of bozos. They need to re-vote this, and not any stupid vote by mail arrangement, either.
Michigan would be split evenly if this occurred. Have to consider that almost all of those who cast a vote for “Uncommitted” were not in favor of Clinton…whose name was on the ballot. In addition several surveys show that Obama and Clinton would be pretty close to splitting the vote and have been for awhile. It’s unlikely that any would get more than miniscule differences.
I’d say allow them in…but without their Superdelegates at the State level…to punish THEM for undertaking this hare-brained scheme.
Ditto for Florida~ strip them of any Superdelegates (or at least those that are involved at the State party level). But there a mail-in might be more reasonable. I think that Clinton was ahead about 20 delegates in the January vote. She might win more, or less. Hard to guess.
If the money is given to the State Democratic Party there is, apparently, no spending cap. A bit moneybags could, thus, cough up the dough to do this.
If you’re feeling like things are slow here, it’s because there’s a new thread up top asking “Should Spitzer Resign?”
You don’t have to quit talking on this thread, but I just wanted to give a heads up about the new thread, too.
No short memories, at all. What you are hearing is simply spin by a certain campaign to justify seating the delegations in full. NH, NV and SC all moved their primaries with the permission of the DNC, and were within the rules in doing so. There were both time-windows and an established sequence established by the Rules Committee. None of the moves you’ve cited above has violated the rules, unlike Florida and Michigans leapfrogs.
Huh? It’s always been about the RULZ since last August. This has been out there and totally in the open since the DNC Committee voted on it.
Of the remaining candidates, there’s been one completely consistent throughout this whole saga.
Howard Dean is bringing some much needed discipline to the DemcratIC Party and should be applauded for it.
dakaine01 at #30 answered why the other states were’nt punished. Basically, they didn’t violate the DNC Committee’s RULZ, while FL and MI did. It’s all quite simple. Hillary is just trying to muddy the waters and find some leverage out this now.
More info here.
I’ve come down to this.
The ELECTED delegations should be seated. But the State Representatives and Superdelegates associated with any Florida/Michigan party function, any Democratic elected official AND any who advocated an early primary…banned from the Convention. BANNED!
I think the candidtates should both pay for the primaries since it’s going to give them at least what they spend in free advertisement
I think 50-50 After all, the delegates in close primaries are dividing close to that.
Having Hillary supporters raise money for this revote doesnt smell good to me.
I don’t like the idea of two supporters fundraising for it; it brings to mind Nascar jumpsuits covered in sponsorships
OT-Tucker’s being replaced with David Gregory… *groan*
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvn….._79388.asp
little off topic and some news some might take as good, some might take as bad;
rove expects to be indicted by the end of the year
sounds like good news right?
wrong
rove is wrong about everything, if he maintains his level of accuracy it means he will never be indicted
pity that
I support the re-vote. So does my lady.
okk and Lahoma.
Stephanie Miller always picks the wrong weeks to take vacation…
Obama wasn’t even on the ballot in Michigan. I don’t understand how Clinton can request that they get seated “as is” for that state.
Oh, I forgot to add that I’m totally behind a re-do vote but I’m not liking the financing option of Corzine and Rendell raising money for it
McCain: “Like most Americans, I visit my doctor all the time” or something like that…
Ummm….like the 47,000,000 uninsured Americans?
Obama took his name off the ballot voluntarily.
Heh, I was hoping for Rachel, tho…! But, David is as bad as Tucker…
Let’s see now. $20,000,000 for a re-vote. $15,000,000,000 per month for unwinnable wars. A projected three trilion dollars for these wars.
I’m not sure but hadn’t she promised to do the same as well?
Redo, with Obama on the ballot. Don’t know how they should pay for it though.
40% of MI Dems voted uncommitted…
Along with Edwards, Richardson and Biden. Why didn’t Hillary again?
I believe all she had promised to do was not campaign in MI which I believe she abided by. Same as with Florida
Exactly, that is why there has to be a re-do
I’m looking it up as we speak *g*
Will report back in a minute
no – she promised not to campaign (and she did not campaign there)… Obama and Edwards took their names off the ballot as a campaign tactic. to help them win Iowa and to devalue the vote in MI (thinking it would have no importance).
Didn’t work out quite right, did it?
I don’t think it even matters in the primaries if there is a revote. Even if you seat the delegates Hillary still cannot catch Obama. Only the superdelegates matter know. IMO I do not believe the FLA or MI voters have been disenfranchised, because we are talking primary voting not general election.
Was the FLA primary date move up the idea of the Dem who introduced the legislative package on paper trail and re-count laws or was it an amendment by GOP? If it is GOP’s fault then make their legislature pay for it. Or just let the delegates vote how they want like supers.
Too funny! (snicker). Nothing like objectivity when making a decision.
It was a strategy employed by those 3 candidates… they were trying to make sure they nullified the vote… which they accomplished.
Every vote DOES count and both Michigan and Florida had the opportunity to vote for something OTHER than a Republican State legislative body that then voted to impact National Democratic circumstances EVEN AFTER THEY WERE TOLD IT WOULD IMPACT THE STANDING OF THEIR DELEGATES.
Isn’t anyone else a little bit concerned that a Republican state legislation be allowed to play a role in a national Democratic circumstance?
Wasn’t the DNC decision that the delegates of those two states would not be seated?
I’m coming up with thaat she promised not to campaign and not to participate in the contests in these two states — participate would be name on ballot, no? Let me find the link
Here’s Jeralyn’s account over at TalkLeft.
ot/ bush’s new song and dance, see raw story
Those four candidates you mean? All the frontrunners other than Hillary conspired to nullify the MI vote?
I don’t agree. I think they were showing solidarity with the DNC’s decision, which was voted on by many people. I think Hillary kept her name in order to win some headlines about her “momentum” (which is exactly how this was portrayed in the BigMedia), and to give her this chance to muck things up later if needed, which is exactly what they’re doing now.
Exactly, Dean said they can plead their case to the DNC rules committee at the convention for a determination…
Corporations abroad are about supporting capitalism (but called democracy) and their own private interests. In the US, well that would be socialism or influencing elections, so maybe not. There is a lot of soft money around. Or since the Republican governor of Florida contributed to this mess, maybe his state should pay for a re-vote.
yes, I think it was a strategy… that’s fine… Obama’s got his strategy – “nullifying” opponents is what he does…Clinton is certainly entitled to play her strategy also. please see the TalkLeft link at 64…
Having candidates pay for primaries is an extremely bad precedent and smells of vote-buying.
Okay, so going back when the DNC made it’s ruling against the two states, all the involved parties said that they would not participate and campaign. Now when Michigan came around, she,Kucinich and Dodd(?) opted to not remove their name from the ballot. Why? Don’t know but I would not characterize Edwards, Obama and others decision to adhere to their initial agreement as a campaign tactic.
Umm no offense but I disagree with Jeralyn on this topic
I have to say I am thoroughly sick of the Republican Governor Crist shedding crocodile tears over this and talking about how it was all decided in a bipartisan way.
Actually, in all fairness it should be paid for by the stupid state legislatures that made this necessary.
nullifying? which opponents are you referring to ?
where in the rules did it say they had to take their names off the ballot? I just don’t get that as an argument. Not spending money on ads, not putting out campaign flyers is “not campaigning”… this other sounds like sour grapes to me.
Not campaigning can be construed as not participating. Half of the Ds took their names of the ballot in MI (their choice) and half chose not to do so. I believe it all falls under allowable campaign strategies.
I agree. My issue is the campaigns raising money to fund it, way too Nascar like for me
Old coastie, cut the BS hahahaha
It may or may not, I just wanted the wording to be clear.
I’m sorry but Hillary Clintonm took 55% of the Michigan vote. Uncommitted took 40%. Don’t know how you count, to me it looks like a win for Hillary. Dodd, Gravel and Kucinich were also on that ballot. But since Obama and Edwards both urged their supporters to vote umcommitted, Obama should not be allowed to lay claim to all uncommitted.
I’m not advancing an argument. I had heard something and I wanted to verify if what I heard was true or not. Having done so, people can make up their own minds, right?
That is precisely why a re-vote needs to happen. Let the uncommitted state who they want
No matter what the rationale, it’s comming down to a point where about half of Democratic voters will believe they’ve been disenfranchised if this nomination process isn’t perceived as being fair. I think it behooves each of us to figure out what will be perceived as the fairest process, rather than to rationalize the one that works to the advantage of our favored candidate.
Obama’s state senate run.
I have to say that I really like the idea of letting Michigan and Florida re-vote on their pledged delegates but stripping both states of all of their superdelegates. That way, the people get to vote, and the idiots who made this mess get punished.
When did Obama urge them to vote uncommtted?
I believe there are those who have contended that HRC and BO having fund raisers in FL prior to their vote was “campaigning” and their was a small uproar when Bo did a “nationwide” ad buy that included FL prior to the vote. He was given a pass when he stated he couldn’t break the FL cities out of the mix.
They’ve both done borderline items in this issue.
Why wasn’t all this sorted out early on? The DNC knew this could be a mess even if they couldn’t read tea leaves. The potential was there. I thought this was bad practice at the time. Now it’s come back to bit us in the a..
Whatever role the Republicans played in this early on, why let them have power over the DNC? Do nothing just does that – does nothing.
Her proof of Obama not having a chance in MI, so that’s why he pulled his name, is a poll from Oct showing Obama down 16%?!? In Oct, 16% would’ve been considered one of his closer races.
Whenever Obama has the chance to go head-to-head with Hillary, his numbers go up dramatically as they even did in OH (he made up 12% in less than two weeks), and TX where he has now won the delegate count, so TX should be considered an Obama win, since “it’s all about the delegates” after all.
Hillary danced around the rules with her visits to FL as well, and I’ll personally need a more convincing case to make me believe that Obama, Edwards, Richardson, and Biden all conspired to disenfranchise the Dem voters of MI. I still think they were simply showing solidarity with the DNC, which was quite refreshing to me.
Actually, with the nominee still in question, not moving up a primary seems like a better chance for a state to have an impact this year.
When you buy nationwide, you can’t exclude markets as one can’t stop internet advertising from popping up on your computer no matter the state.
Corzine and Rendell have said they would raise money for the revote.
Corzine could just write a check.
yes, I’m sorry… it seems to be a talking point pushed that Obama and Edwards somehow did the “right thing” – something required, when really – it was a campaign tactic… an effective one, but a tactic nonetheless… there was nothing in the Four State Pledge they all signed that said word one about taking their names off the ballot…
thanks for the link. I’m waiting for it to come up so i can read
Seems like the Clintons could as well.
TeeVee stations should pay- they’re the ones who undoubtedly bribed the state legislatures to move the primaries up in hopes of baggin more advertising revenue.
They were worried that it would all be over early and no money would be spent in their states.
Yeah, that’s the irony. As far as FL and MI voters not having their say, that’s normally the case for the voters of most states. Still, we’re talking about the party staying together and I think new primaries in those states would be accepted as the fairest means. Counting them as is would be the most unfair and, based on my own feelings, lose a big block of Democrats in November.
To be fair, that is your characterization just as someone saying that the other candidates removing their names were doing the ‘right thing’ — it’s a characterization.
actually, it was John Conyers, a super delegate for Obama, who urged people to vote uncommitted.
yes, it is a characterization, but I don’t think it is inaccurate.
How bout a hooker surcharge at the political conventions- that should cover it!
I’m confused as to what this demonstrates? She backed down on a promise and he took it to the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners as is the process.
A pretty impressive GOTV for Uncommitted, if you ask me.
Would Democrats who voted Republican in the Michigan primary to keep Romney in the race get to vote again? That would be two votes that count.
I think Obama should suck it up and offer to give Hillary her 55%, and take the rest for himself. That seems to me to be more than fair to Hillary, and a gracious display of diplomacy.
In the Vatican’s latest update on how God’s law is being violated in today’s world, Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti, the head of the Apostolic Penitentiary, was asked by the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano what, in his opinion, are the “new sins.”
He cited “violations of the basic rights of human nature” through genetic manipulation, drugs that “weaken the mind and cloud intelligence,” and the imbalance between the rich and the poor.
“If yesterday sin had a rather individualistic dimension, today it has a weight, a resonance, that’s especially social, rather than individual,” said Girotti, whose office deals with matters of conscience and grants absolution.
Didn’t know that the Vatican had a penitentiary.
Then one could argue that the other characterization is no more inaccurate than your own. that is just to be fair,right?
If there are primaries in Fl and Mi in June..will they get the bonus delegates? I have not seen this discussed.
link
My mother called me about that this morning and all I could do was mutter under my breath
Are Hilllary and Obama bein EVIL again?
I think it is a method – nulifying your opponent – that he has used is all… and I think it bears similarity to the MI situation – just an observation…
I just don’t get how it is nullification if it is the process put forward by the Election Commission.
perhaps – I am only speaking for myself.
I figure they have violated a few of the ‘new’ deadly sins *snark*
If your just stating an opinion, then I can understand it as such. thanks for the link, BTW
Was he talking about Bush?
I don’t understand your point. My opinion is that Obama has learned the lesson of minimizing your opponent. He was effective in using that in Illinois and he employed the same tactic, along with others in MI. This is not a criticism of Obama. This is his strategy and it has worked for him in the past.
I do think this has backfired on him in a way he did not expect in Michigan. I think a do-over is now necessary to make seating MI legitimate. I believe, in the longer view, that seating MI and FL are necessary for the general election.
so if we get the troops home an hour and a half early — done deal with money to spare!
I wonder if it’s possible, now, to have this discussion without ascribing candidate favoritism to anyone’s proposed solutions. Not just here on this blog, but anywhere.
Whenever I hear someone propose any solution for MIFL, I wonder first, “Who are they supporting?”
You mean because no matter who proposes whatever solution it’s all a big conspiracy cuz your candidate is a saint and mine teh sux?
My point was that i didn’t understand your characterization of that incident as nullification when what he did was to follow the process outlined by the election board to contest / lodge a complaint about voter issues.
I was just trying to understand the premise of the argument you were advancing. At the end, I can say that I see where you are coming from but respectfully disagree
They can’t come home just yet. The Brave Bushes are about to start serving, right?
I would love a re-do regardless of who it favors but I don’t want the campaigns financing it because of the appearance of possible vote buying
Maybe Diebold could do it for free, as kind of a demo for their latest, state-of-the-art equipment.
*g*
A rumor going around Spitzer might resign tonight.
http://wcbstv.com/breakingnews…..73848.html
We shall see…
HAHA!
A dyslexic might take away an entirely different meaning to your comment if they didn’t read your acronym correctly.
Looks ta me as if GW Clusterfuck is headed STRAIGHT ta hell-
Yeah, right *G* I trust them like i trust my pup around steak, it’s just to tempting
He’s had a special place there on reserve for a while *G*
I don’t even think there will be a re-vote.
Obama’s campaign would need to agree to it, and he has absolutely no incentive to do so.
All the talk of MI and FL do-overs come from HRC supporters.
ROFL … I did a double take … MIFL or MILF … gotta go see an Optometrist tomorrow … *g*
If Spitzer resigns, Lt. Gov Paterson sounds interesting:
http://www.ny.gov/ltgov/index.html
Never heard of him before, but so far so good.
Don’t get me started!
It may or may not have been a campaign tactic but the fact remains that the four at least put forth an appearance of supporting the DNC rules. Many times in politics and other areas (legal) the appearance of propriety is necessary to maintain faith in the process. And the four candidates made decisions to look as if they were doing the right thing (intentions and/or results predicted aside). Hillary and the others decided that puling out was not necessary. It had nothing to due with the respect for the voters. That is why the rules must be abided. Good/Bad intentions can’t not be interpreted or established with any certainty only factual circumstances can be proven. The Rules are meant to circumvent the need to extract true intentions of those who wish to change the process or election result.
NYMEX standard crude future is currently trading at $108.12/bbl and the Cushing Spot is at $107.90. Something as they say has got to give and I’m thinking it will be the US economy. By my ballpark calculations using the Cushing Spot price and the fall in the dollar against the Euro as benchmarks, hedge fund speculation accounts for just a shade under 30% of today’s crude oil price. After having ravaged the housing market, this band of locusts is doing what they did there to crude oil prices. And this is a good thing, why? And why are market regulators allowing this?
teddy at 119—
i agree…….
========
florida should stand as voted.
michigan, track down everyone who voted uncommitted and let them vote again, everyone else, should stand as voted.
oh, and teddy, to answer your part two of your 119
dodd
The states that decided knowingly to buck the system should pay, IMHO. They should not get off scot free for not playing by the rules.
It might give them second thoughts about playing this game next go round. And believe me, there will be a next round. Sooner or later, if they get away with it this time, some loop hole will be found to do it again. And get away with it again.
Yes, I am glad you understand this.
Because the market regulators are Republics! We’ll see more record profits for the Oil Companies and the Arab owners of the Bush family. It’s “Mission Accomplished” over and over!
1,782 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
CitizenTeddySanFran:
“Whenever I hear someone propose a solution for MIFL, I wonder first ‘Who are they supporting?’”
Yes and that’s the whole point of this mess isn’t it…this started because the strategy of one candidate and faction tried ta front load the primaries and caucuses to end the process before it could get started and leverage the power of early money and institutional support. Howard Dean saw it comin’ like a high, slow breakin’ ball and knocked it right the fuck outta the park and everyone involved accepted his decision EXCEPT for the faction that had early money and institutional support (and they agreed by not protesting when Dean’s decision was announced).
In my opinion, this whole mess points to the fundamental conflict between the old, corrupted corporate Democratic Party and the new grassroots progressive force that is tryin’ ta re-institute somthin’ resemblin’ democracy on both the party and the country. Mrs. Clinton’s clique created this problem and now all of us hafta try and find a way ta give her supporters in Michigan and Florida their vote that she coulda saved for ‘em by not runnin’ in the two primaries and encouragin’ both states to schedule later.
No Teddy, don’t use that Clinton-McCain tactic of tattooin’ folks who are tryin ta solve the problem you actually created.
Whatever solution comes outta the DNC with the support of the leadership in the two states should be billed directly to the Clinton-McCain campaign.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITON, THESE BASTARDS CAN’T BE TRUSTED WITH THE KEYS TO THE CAR…WHY WOULD WE LET ‘EM DRIVE IT OUTTA THE PARKIN’ LOT??!!
OK MODERATOR…WHERE’S THE POST??!!
Oops, you are right! I looked it up after I hit send.
One question: for Florida, did anyone ever produce a delegate map like we get for other states, or were delegates just assumed based upon the state-wide totals?
Obama will probably have two big wins this week, but will not pick up too many additional delegates.
Also, I just heard that MI and FL have even lost their superdelegates, is this right?
Shouting will not make your comments appear any quicker.
I think this is a terrible mess. I am sick of this passing the buck on Florida and MI, and I almost don’t care what the solution is and which candidate benefits, so long as Michigan and Florida voters are satisfied. I think this is too important an election to disenfranchise or penalize MI and Florida voters. The spectre of a 100 years of wars McCain and his little terrier “bomb Iran” Lieberman is just waaay too scary.
I have no idea why Rush Limbaugh is playing concern troll all of a sudden for the Democratic party either.
Let the DNC pay. We are bankrupt in Michigan. The state party blew it with Governor Granholm. leading the charge. Dean was asleep at the switch too it seems. Didn’t he try to argue against this early primary silliness personally and repeatedly with her. She isn’t much of a leader and the political gain from this whole thing were really zero so it should have been easy enough to talk her out of it.
It was a harebrained thing to ‘lead’ on and I am pissed about it. Not that I am a party activist or even normally a primary voter. The argument was it would make the candidates address rust belt issues. Duh, earth to Michigan Dems. when it is spelled out, as it should have been, that no candidates would appear in your early primary then your purpose is defeated, witih prejudice.
In that case, I guess its all right to whisper. sorry, *slaps head.*
That’s what sort of gets me. If it wasn’t the voters fault, but had to do with the gov. etc., why doesn’t *someone* suck it up and take the hit (moneywise) and issue an apologia, rather than talk of penalizing voters.
Slightly off topic but in the story just the same…Why do people persist in stating that Bill Clinton went on the Rush Limbaugh show insinuating of course that he was interviewed by Rush, when it is well known that he was interviewed by Mark Davis of WPAB in Arlington, Texas.
Alright.
I’m a Floridian – now so I get an important say here.
this whole thinbg sucks. There is no way on God’s green earth te State is gonna or should pay for this bullshit. People here don’t wanna pay taxes for anything,the economy is in the shitter and there is a huge revenue shortfall. Sorry, I disagee Jane. The election we did have sucked but both candidates pl;ayeed by the same rules. Having a do-over has nothing to do with fairness. If obama had won here, obviously the candidates’ positions would be reversed. It’s about gaining an advantage. The peroposed mail-in do-over arguably will wind up undercaoting or leaving ouit some voters and probably disprortionately por ones that BO would be expected to win. i don’t know if that’s true, but it’s` just going to be eanotherr mess. We should stick with th mess we have.
Who’s to blame for BO not being on the ballot in MI? Presumably he’ll get a bunch of teh undecides who are really anti-HRC, or else they would have voted for her.
Hate to say it, but Bill Clinton’s right on this one.
Carl Levin also voted to move up the primary in Michigan. The reason NV, SC were able to move up was because Dean wanted a better mix of voters in the early states. And that worked out alright. The Florida Dems wanted to move up there primary and so did Michigan, they were told not to do that and they did anyway.Then Crist and the Repubs got involed an shoved it down the dems throat to stay the early date.
It’s mess and I don’t think a do over should be held. The people that put there states in this kind of bind should be voted out of office. next year.
If the Florida Democratic Committee has refused to run their Primary concordant with the Republicans they would have at least had the chance to sue. Presumably legislatures are not supposed to become the political machine to suppress another political party from operating in the State. If the legislature finances one primary it must finance the other.
But by accepting the new date (which the Party leaders actually did want, and saw the Republican decision as a way to argue that they “had to”) it took away any chance at litigation. Now they have to fund their own election.
If the DNC is compelled to cough up the $$$ for a authorized election, or has to seat delegates, there must be a “price”.
I’d suggest, right off the bat,
a) disaccrediting all the Superdelegates and Party Officers from Florida and Michigan. This would allow the elected delegates some voice (however structured) but make those at the higher levels who were involved, or should have stopped it, lose their voice. That voice was a “privilege” and given that they have created both a huge financial and political headache for the Party they deserve to lose that voice. Party hacks could not circumvent this by becoming “elected representatives”.
b) Both slates of delegates should be selected proportionate to Statewide %. Thus, in Florida, Edwards delegates will get approximately 15% of the vote even though he might not have reached the necessary quotas in any district. Obama will receive about 35% of the delegates. Clinton about 50%.
b) compelling Michigans “Undeclared” to not vote for Clinton…but be allowed to support any other delegate on the first ballot. Afterwards all delegates would be released.
c) If the elections don’t take place for replacement delegates then the DNC could also consider something like what the Republicans allowed. They could allow 50% of the delegation (proportionately divided, and less the “party hacks”) to participate in the first vote, 75% in the second cycle, 85% in the third, and 100% if there are four ballots necessary. If the % doesn’t work out to be exact, round up to the nearest “body”.
Contrary to what some have said about the Florida bill, it wasn’t merely something forced on the Democrats by “Republican Majority”.
The Florida legislature voted House Bill 537 to move forward the date of their state’s primary to January 29th with bipartisan support: 118 to 0 in the House, 37 to 2 in the Senate.
The Florida “Dims” (and I, as a Democrat, use that term quite appropriately in this case) who voted for this Bill, the Party leaders, and Superdelegates should be forbidden to participate at the National Convention. I would suggest the DNC could seat the regular delegates, but only allow non-party leaders to sit as delegates. If some State Rep is a delegate they have to give their seat over to someone else. No relatives or staff-people allowed, either. They should select someone at the District level.
It’s hard to sort through all of the murky details on this, but my understanding is that the bill moving up the Florida primary was attached to legislation that no one could be on record voting against, hence the unanimous vote.
I’m a Hillary supporter, and I think the Michigan results should count. It’s very clear that there was absolutely no requirement for Obama and Edwards to take their names off the ballot, and I happen to believe that it was done for strategic reasons. But the notion that they did it because they really, really supported the DNC’s decision, while Hillary only kinda supported it, is pretty weak. Especially since Obama clearly committed more violations of the agreement in Florida, where I guess his support for the DNC wasn’t quite as robust.
Giving the uncommitted votes to Obama is ridiculous, as is spltting evereything 50-50. It’s interesting that Obama supporters are so concerned about the purity of the process, yet their solution is to award votes to Obama that he never earned. If you think about it, all Hillary is asking for is to get the votes that were actually cast for her.
With the turnout in Florida at record highs, and everyone being on relatively equal footing, the results there should stand, as well. Obama supporters seem to think that only Obama voters stayed home because they thought it didn’t count. I’ve yet to see any rationale for arguing that Obama was at a disadvantage in Florida. As a matter of fact, I think his TV ads gave him an advantage.
I recognize, however, that this is an argument that totally favors one side, particularly in Michigan. I don’t see how there can be any solution except for a revote. For those claiming that Hillary ”broke the rules,” or wants to ”change the rules,” it would help if you knew which rules you are referencing. The DNC decision specifically stated that both states could appeal to the credentials committee for reinstatement. Hillary has urged her delegates to vote in favor of the appeal. Exactly which rules is she supposed to be breaking here?
You know what’s not a rule? That if neither candidate gets to the convention with 2,025 delegates, the nomination automatically goes to the candidate with the most pledged delegates. That’s not a rule. That’s called ”neither one of you won.” Despite how the Obama campaign tries to portray it, both candidates will be looking to the supers to put them over the top. He needs them as much as she does, and you can bet Daschle and Kennedy aren’t engaging in the ”new politics” as they arm twist the supers. And neither is the Clinton campaign. It’s called politics.
Hilary is a republican. I don’t care what she calls herself. She voted for the war and will continue the war.
Can’t go for that.
The people who chose to set the dates should pay.
I assume that this would be the State Democratic Party Chairs and or Committees.
Hillary would not vote against Mukasey’s confirmation (campaigning was more important)
Hillary would not vote against telecom immunity (campaigning was more important)
Campaigning for President seems to be more important to Senator Clinton than actually using the power she holds now to uphold and defend the Constitution. If she doesn’t do it now, why should we expect her to do it when she has even more power?
Obama currently has a lead of 150 delegates, last time I checked. If the Michigan and Florida delegations are seated, that gives Hillary 178 delegates and the lead. (If Obama can lead in delegates by more than 178, of course, this all becomes moot). The DNC has set up a situation where, no matter which candidate wins the nomination, the other can plausibly claim that the win was illegitimate. Hillary can claim that Obama only won by suppressing votes. Obama can claim that Hillary only won by breaking and changing the rules. This is exactly the nightmare scenario that the Michigan and Florida folks begged the DNC to consider when they were asking them to stick to the rules as written and only cut down their delegations by half instead of exceeding the rules (which they had the option to do) at Donna Brazile’s behest and giving them “the death penalty”.
The DNC could have followed their own rules and simply reduced Michigan and Florida’s delegations by half. Instead, they chose to create a delegate nightmare and toss two key states into McCain’s column. The disaster was both predictable and predicted.
As for a re-vote, I think it’s a nice thought but it’s never going to happen. Too many arguments about money and type of election, two candidates committed to opposite goals – one getting the delegations seated as-is no matter what, and another to keeping them locked out. The DNC blew it and now they are just going to have to live with the consequences of their actions.