Michigan and Florida looming large

[Perky]

Should they be seated?

I have ommitted a "Michigan only" option because most of the Candidates withdrew from the ballot and Clinton has not suggested the Michigan be seated.

[joshcryer]

1. Both Obama and Hillary said they would seat them.

I don't know what the controversey is!

[Perky]

4. I honestly do not think Obama has sais that do you have a link?

I am pretty sure Axelrod siad the rules should be followed and called Hillary on it as a flipflopper

[joshcryer]

9. The Obama campaign and supporters here keep accusing Hillary of wanting to seat them for nomination.

That's an outright lie, and completely misinformed, she never said that. I can find a link, give me a minute. Obama would seat them unless it hurts him, if it hurts him expect a brokered convention because it's just too close to call at that point.

[joshcryer]

10. Here's just one of many links:

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/30/obama-vows-do-whats-right/?news-breaking

Obama has said he won't *commit* to seating those delegates because obviously he knows there's the (still unlikely) scenario where it could *hurt* him. But he, and people here, don't understand that really just means a bokered convention if it comes to that. He can decide not to seat him all he wants, the convention would be brokered.

[Perky]

15. That is some one's opiinion it is not Obama or Axelrod.

[joshcryer]

16. Fine, let me find a more recent link where he said it.

He said it.

[joshcryer]

19. Here you go:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/29/618263.aspx

On Florida and Clinton saying she would reinstate Florida’s delegates... the Democratic National Committee told First Read months ago that any eventual nominee would likely work with a credentialing committee to seat a non-voting Florida delegation.

“Those decisions would be made after the nomination not before,” Obama said. “The DNC has been clear about its positions. Obviously I care a lot about the people in Michigan and the people in Florida, and I want their votes in the general election and will be actively campaigning for it.”

[Perky]

27. right after the nomination is decided and they would not vote .

as opposed to Hillary who said the day before the Florida primary



"I will try to persuade my delegates to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida," Clinton said Sunday in Tennessee, arguing that she was bowing to political reality. "Democrats have to win Michigan and have to try to win Florida and I intend to do that. The people of Florida deserve to be represented in the process of picking a candidate for president of the United States."


http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/state/epaper/2008/01/28/m1a_demprez_0128.html

[joshcryer]

32. There's nothing in there that suggests rule-breaking by Hillary. Sorry, try again.

[Alexander]

40. Nowhere in that quote does it say he'd try to seat the delegates.

Let me guess, reading comprehension was never your strong suit.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. There's a difference between the two --

Hillary says she'd seat them because she'd be the obvious beneficiary of doing so.
Obama (if he actually DID say so - I hadn't heard it) would only say so to keep from having 'sour grapes' accusations thrown at him - even though he'd come out worse off because of Hillary's cheating, he doesn't want the appearance of 'sore loser'.

Tho I said seat neither, I think a do-over in both states, seating the resulting delegates from both, is a good option - it would allow full participation by BOTH remaining candidates, that way. You know, fair play.

[joshcryer]

8. No, that's ridiculous. Neither can seat unless they have the nomination.

Hillary never said, NEVER SAID she would seat them or "try to seat them" if she didn't have the nomination.

They both would seat them out of party unity.

[Perky]

11. she said FLorida should count on her to fight for them to be seated

she said that the days before they went to the polls... She never put a caveat in their (about her being the nominee first)

If she wins the nomination with out them that fine. if Obama wins without them and she puts up a fight about florida... It is a going to be a bloodbath.

[joshcryer]

14. That's a lie and you will be unable to find a link substantiating that lie.

[Perky]

24. here you go

"I will try to persuade my delegates to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida," Clinton said Sunday in Tennessee, arguing that she was bowing to political reality. "Democrats have to win Michigan and have to try to win Florida and I intend to do that. The people of Florida deserve to be represented in the process of picking a candidate for president of the United States."

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/state/epaper/2008/01/28/m1a_demprez_0128.html

[joshcryer]

33. As I said, you would be unable to substantate rule beaking by Hillary.

[Perky]

37. Josh...You just moved the Goalposts out of the stadium

You said

"Hillary never said, NEVER SAID she would seat them or "try to seat them" if she didn't have the nomination"

I said

"she said that the days before they went to the polls... She never put a caveat in their (about her being the nominee first)"

You said:

"That's a lie and you will be unable to find a link substantiating that lie. "

I provided the following quote

""I will try to persuade my delegates to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida," Clinton said Sunday in Tennessee, arguing that she was bowing to political reality. "Democrats have to win Michigan and have to try to win Florida and I intend to do that. The people of Florida deserve to be represented in the process of picking a candidate for president of the United States." And the link.


I never said she was rul-breaking I said she wanted to change the rules and she said so prior to Florida voting and that she never provided the caveat that she would have the nomination serwn up first.

SHe clearly is saying that she want to seat the delegation so that they may vote for the nominee.

I never accused of breaking the rules. But she certainly has said that she wanted to fight to change the rules without the caveat of being nominated first.

Axelrod, on the other hand would be happy to seat the delegation in non-voting status.

There is a huge difference.

[Perky]

43. well?

[Perky]

29. Well?

[Perky]

12. she said FLorida should count on her to fight for them to be seated

she said that the days before they went to the polls... She never put a caveat in their (about her being the nominee first)

If she wins the nomination with out them that fine. if Obama wins without them and she puts up a fight about florida... It is a going to be a bloodbath.

[displacedtexan]

2. Were I an Obama supporter...

I'd want them seated, too.

[harun]

22. That's BS, Obama wasn't even on the ballot (n/t)

[skipos]

3. I live in MI. I know Hillary pretends to care about us now that she needs us

but I think the ruling should stand. We can't change the rules just because it benefits the Clintons.

[Bad Thoughts]

5. Two possible remedies

1. Hold a late contest. It's not too late to have a legitimate contest that conforms to the party's rules. Indeed, it looks like late states will make a difference in this election, and voters will appreciate being heard.

2. Restore the superdelegates. The rationale for their exclusion bewilders me, given that their votes are not contingent upon when Florida votes. But they do, in some ways, speak to the minds of people in Michigan and Florida.

[Perky]

28. Escept that it was the party official in Florida who are the ones responsible.

Both the lected folks like Bill Nelson and the Fl Dem committee They are all super delegates.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

31. #1 is the only solution that makes sense to me

Hold the primary all over again, this time for real. Or don't count the votes cast in a bogus primary. To announce to the registered voters in the Democratic Party that, if they show up at the polls their votes won't be counted caused thousands to determentally rely on that representation and stay at home. Or vote "uncommitted". The voters who stayed at home who otherwise would have voted if they thought their vote would count would be disenfranchised if the votes of only those who did cast their votes were counted. That's so crystal clear to me and I cannot fathom why others don't see that, unless those others are not concerned a whit about democracy but only partisanship in favor of their candidate and winning at all costs.

[book_worm]

7. The only remedy I think would be either not seat them or allocate the delegates equally.

[joshcryer]

13. Talk about changing the rules... the states select delegates...

...the convention cannot tell delegates how to vote unless they're uncommitted.

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

The convention cannot tell delegates how to vote at all. Period.

The convention CAN, however, uphold the rules that EVERYONE previously agreed to and refuse to seat those delegates for breaking those rules. Clinton's "I will try to convince my delegates" is bullshit, because her delegates have no authority to seat FL delegates - it takes the agreement of the convention as a whole to set aside the standing rule.

Also, the bullshit about "allowing the people to have their vote" in choosing the president is ALSO bullshit because they WILL have a vote in the general election - this rule does not keep them from voting against the republican nominee, so they are NOT being disenfranchised. The ones who are preventing the people from being counted in the primary are Ben Nelson and the DLC (Hillary supporters).

Question: Why would Hillary supporters break the rules, then argue afterward to change the outcome of breaking those rules?

[mac2]

17. Since the 70s the party has screwed around with the

delegates (as many as 800 Super Delegates which aren't elected)and primary dates. They have made it so they decide not the party members if an election is close.

Time for change to a more democratic system.

[demo dutch]

18. Poll did not incl "It should be about Voters first and foremost!" - broker an agreement

[joshcryer]

20. No agreement needs to be made, both Obama and Hillary state they want to seat the delegates.

And Hillary has NEVER stated that she wanted to do so outside of DNC rules.

[demo dutch]

23. Hadn't heard that Obama agreed

[joshcryer]

34. Obama agreed because it's only common sense, party unity and all that.

Yes they don't count toward the nomination, but they have a place at the DNC. And Obama is giddy I'm sure at the prospect of not seating those delegates as many of his supporters seem to be.

[1awake]

21. I will support Hillary

unless she attempts to go against the known rules concerning Michigan and Florida. If she does that to win, I will not support her.

[4themind]

25. Should be interesting..

It'll be interesting to see what strategy is pursed by both camps depending upon their perception of the delegate total

[marlakay]

26. Going to be a fucking mess if they seat this

not fair to Obama who didn't campaign. If they insist on counting then they should have a do over caucus style instead of chads this time and really get the vote out!!!!!!!!!

[joshcryer]

35. Don't worry, doesn't count toward the nomination, but seating is both Obama and Hillary's goal.

[themaguffin]

36. They were not real contests, therefore many did not vote who would

If the DNC wants to have another date, fine otherwise, under no circumstances are these legitimate results.

[yellowcanine]

38. Don't know about Michigan but in Florida it was the REPUBLICAN legislature that

passed the law setting the primary date - just to stir up trouble for the DNC. I don't think we should accomodate them. The DNC should sit down with the Florida and Michigan Democrats and work something out. There is nothing to say that they could not hold caucuses to determine the delegations. Obviously the results would now have "meaning" so the original reason for moving up the primary dates is moot anyway.

[Seabiscuit]

39. Very incomplete, haphazard choices you've got there, Perky.

[Liberalynn]

41. self detete

system told me it failed to post, so I rewrote it, only to find it did post.

Sorry.

[Liberalynn]

42. Isn't there a danger here?

What if the Dem voters in these states say to the party, hey you don't want to hear our voices in the primaries so why do you need us in the general election either?

I thought it was a stupid idea to not count their votes before Hillary's showing there, and I would think it just as wrong if Obama had participated and taken those votes, for them not to count. Its just going to tick those states off and the fact is we do need them in the General Election, no matter who the nominee is.

Punish the assinine state party leaders for their violation of the rules by demoting them, not by denying the voters.

Have an actual primary do over. Then seat them. That would be fair to both candidates and the electorate.