Easy Answers Elude Mich., Fla. Delegates - WaPo

[WillyT]

<snip>

MILWAUKEE -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton desperately wants meaningless wins in Florida and Michigan to turn into votes she can count on. It won't be easy with the Democratic National Committee rules standing in her way. The DNC is refusing to back down from the tough sanctions it imposed on the two states, which held early contests in violation of party rules. They have been stripped of all their delegates to the national convention in August where either Clinton or rival Sen. Barack Obama will be nominated for president.

The DNC has offered Florida and Michigan a couple ways out in compliance with party rules. First, they could hold second nominating contests, but Democratic leaders in both states reject that idea. Or they can appeal to the DNC's credentials committee, a 186-member body that usually operates in obscurity and has a complicated membership and rules process that will require deft maneuvering in this divided campaign. Just like the some 800 superdelegates, this committee could hold the cards in helping decide the Democratic nominee if the race stays close.

Obama said Friday that he wants Michigan and Florida _ two key states in the general election campaign _ to participate in the convention without affecting the outcome of the election. He did not provide specifics about conditions except to say it wouldn't be fair for Clinton to get the majority.

"I want to make sure that the Michigan and Florida delegates have the means to participate," he said at a news conference. "There are probably a whole slew of different solutions that could be come up with that would both achieve the interests of making sure that Michigan and Florida delegates participate without skewing the delegate count."

Clinton's campaign insists the delegates should be seated in accordance with more than 2 million votes cast in the two states last month. "I think that the people of Michigan and Florida spoke in a very convincing way, that they want their voices and their votes to be heard," Clinton told reporters. "The turnout in both places was record-breaking and I think that that should be respected."

Clinton did not object to the DNC stripping the states of their delegates when the decision was made last year. Some of her backers were on the committee that made the decision to do so and actively supported it. "Now, when they believe it serves their political interests, they're trying to rewrite the rules," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said in a call with reporters.

As of Thursday, the delegate count stood at 1,280 for Obama and 1,218 for Clinton. If the DNC were to award Michigan and Florida's 313 delegates based on the vote in their primaries, she would be ahead because she won both states.

That would be unfair, Obama said, because the candidates had promised not to compete in those renegade states. "I think even my 6-year-old would understand it would not be fair for Senator Clinton to be awarded delegates when there was no campaign," he told reporters Friday.

Clinton's operatives want DNC chairman Howard Dean to come up with a resolution, but Dean is staying out of the fight for now. Dean spokesman Karen Finney said Florida and Michigan still have a choice to follow the rules. "At this point, there are still more than 1,000 pledged delegates to be determined and 33 percent of our party has yet to have the opportunity to have their voices heard, so it would be premature to speculate," Finney said. Dean declined an interview request.

On Friday, Florida House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber suggested on his blog that Democrats hold a vote-by-mail "runoff." That would mean all 4.1 million Florida Democrats would be mailed another ballot to vote for either Obama or Clinton. The state party, though, has said it is going to stick with the results of the primary vote. Part of the problem is cost _ it's estimated the party would need to spend about $4.5 million to hold the revote.

Most of the credentials committee members will be appointed by the Clinton and Obama campaigns, depending on how they perform in nominating contests across the country, with Dean having already named 25. Although Obama has won more contests so far, Clinton has won most of the larger states _ and larger states get more seats. So there's the potential for the committee to be closely divided if the race stays tight.

The credential committee would meet in July or August, and its decision would be in the form of a recommendation to all the delegates at the convention. They have a range of options to consider, including recommending reinstatement of all or some of the delegates divided any way they see fit between Obama and Clinton. The recommendation would become the first order of business at the convention on Aug. 25.

One Clinton adviser, speaking on a condition of anonymity, said there are no legal options to pursue in courts, which give parties wide latitude in crafting their rules.

<snip>

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/16/AR2008021600918_pf.html

:shrug:

[Birthmark]

1. Not speaking of MI

...since I'm not familiar with their situation, but in FL the solution is simple. Seat the delegates. There was a huge turnout for the Democratic Primary that adequately represented the will of FL's people. It's not that tough at all.

[WillyT]

2. I Guess... That Is, If Violating The Rules Is Easy For You

:shrug:

[Birthmark]

3. I didn't violate any rules

I voted at the time designated by the State Legislature of Florida. I have no choice in the matter. Where are my due process rights in this mess, btw?

[WillyT]

10. And I'm Sorry That Your State Party Disenfranchised You, But...

Your state fucking up, should not impact in any way, the remaining states who stood by the rules, and functioned according to those rules.

Hold another primary, hold a caucus, but those votes as they stand now, are illegitimate.

You DO NOT change the rules in the middle of a contest!

Sorry...

:shrug:

[Birthmark]

20. How to say this as respectfully as possible...

...Bite me!

No FL delegates at the Convention, no vote in November. (And the seated delegates BETTER represent the voting results.)

I'm sure you'll enjoy President McCain. I hear he's a fine fellow.

[WillyT]

23. Aw... Don't Go Away Mad !!! - Just Go Away...

And don't forget your marbles...



Bye now!

:hi:

[Birthmark]

33. Gee, the Obamalamdingdongs are a mature bunch.

Can't wait to see how they'll whine when McCain is sworn in. But that doesn't matter. First, Obama has to win. If that means disenfranchising Florida Democrats, so be it. The Messiah must not be denied.

[slick8790]

41. If you're really that much of a selfish idiot

Then i'm sure you'll enjoy president mccain too. Some things are more important than proving a point.

[Birthmark]

45. Yeah, I'd have to be a selfish idiot...

...to defend my right to vote. I mean, no one BUT a selfish idiot would defend their right to self-determination. That's your assertion anyway. But I think I'll decline to have my rights trampled upon for the sake of a trivial rule. I'm sorry if this causes you some personal discomfort and might work against your candidate. If it makes you feel any better, I'd be saying the exact same thing for the exact same reasons if Obama stood to gain. My concern is with rights and fundamental fairness, not the DNC's ego or any candidate.

I was for Edwards. No matter what happens, he ain't gonna win FL. lol

[slick8790]

50. If you're really willing to not vote in November,

you are complicit in helping elect a crazy, anti-choice, pro-corporate warmonger. End of story.

[Birthmark]

51. Well, it's that or acquiesce to tyranny

Of course, the situation is very easy to avoid. Seat the delegates. So, if you want that crazy, anti-choice, pro-corporate warmonger sent home instead of to the White House then call the DNC and tell them they better seat FL's delegates. Otherwise, you know what's coming.

[slick8790]

52. Uh huh.

It's tyranny when elected florida officials voted almost unanimously (dem and republican) to move the primary up in direct violation of DNC rules they had agreed to. You break the rules, you pay the price.

[Birthmark]

56. No, you are in favor of...

"they" break the rules, *I* pay the price. Then you have the nerve to get upset when I say if I pay the price so will you. Poor thing. I hope you like President McCain. Blame you can yourself. You are not standing up for what's right, but what's politically expedient for your candidate in the SHORT term. Seems like a bad deal for you.

But it's your prerogative.

[ThatPoetGuy]

28. The whole Florida situation is f-cked up.

It wasn't the Democratic party in Florida that changed the date of the primary. It was the state legislature. The state legislature is Republican.

Republican politicians voted to change Democratic primary procedures in a way that disenfranchised Democrats. Goddamn scumbags.

I don't know what would be the "right" thing to do, at this point.

[Birthmark]

37. The right thing to do is obvious.

Seat FL's delegates. The primary was legit. More Dems voted in this primary than the 2004 primary. There is simply no rational reason to disenfranchise FL Democrats. They didn't break the rules.

The Michigan situation is a bit more complicated and I don't have a clue how it should be resolved. I'm sure that the people of MI can decide for themselves what's appropriate, though.

[Little Star]

62. I agree!

[JackORoses]

27. your elected state officials screwed you, take it up with them

[Birthmark]

35. No, I think I'll take it out on the DNC

It's the DNC that decided my voted didn't count. So, I'll settle up with them in November. Say hello to President McCain. And thank your intransigence for it. You'll have four years, maybe eight, to do so.

Enjoy!

[JackORoses]

54. your vote would have counted if your state had followed the rules

in fact, it still could count if your state would follow the rules.

If you vote for McCain, you weren't a Democrat in the first place.

We'll enjoy crushing him in November.

Just remember, you could have been part of the Revolution, but you held out for spite.
I pity you.

[Birthmark]

58. Yeah, okay.

Allow me to expose the stupidity of your position.

How, exactly, were the Democrats in FL supposed to stop this. And be specific. Because when you try to be specific you're going to find out that you're telling yourself a fair tale. We had NO way of preventing this. None. Now, prove me wrong.

[JVS]

57. You complied with a legislature that was breaking the rules

[Birthmark]

60. Again, my choices were disenfranchise myself...

...or get disenfranchised by the DNC. There is no choice. If the DNC has the brass cojones to disenfranchise me, then so be it. I only wish that they had stood up to Bush with same mindless zeal that they use in abusing the people of Florida and Michigan.

Guess the DNC is a typical bully. Pick on the weak. (NOTE: They didn't disenfranchise our SUPERdelegates, who might have actually been able stop this. Nope. They went for the little guys. Some Democrats.)

[LisaL]

4. MI delegates were voting for Hillary or uncommitted.

Why not seat them too.
Uncommitted could vote however they please.

[Birthmark]

6. Sounds fine to me.

I'm certainly not going to tell the people of MI what they should or shouldn't settle for. If they feel that the situation is resolved to their satisfaction, then fine. If not, I'll back them 100%. It's their state and their votes. I respect their judgment.

[formernaderite]

5. why are the state democrats rejecting the idea of another vote?

"The DNC has offered Florida and Michigan a couple ways out in compliance with party rules. First, they could hold second nominating contests, but Democratic leaders in both states reject that idea."

Sounds good... What's the issue with doing this? It's more than fair of a compromise.

[Birthmark]

7. It is most certainly NOT fair or acceptable.

Nor is it a compromise. No "do overs." We voted in good faith. Those votes should count.

[formernaderite]

9. you voted knowing you would be punished

so in good faith your party leaders went with it anyway.

[Birthmark]

18. So your "logic" is...

- I could either disenfranchise myself by not voting at all

- Or I could vote and be disenfranchised by the DNC

Brilliant! Seriously, there is no way I'll vote in November if that's what the Democratic stands for. No chance in hell. Say hello to President McCain.

[formernaderite]

26. were you arguing with your state party at the begining of this mess?

seriously, this after the fact moaning is ridiculous.

[Birthmark]

31. Are you sane?

Seriously. My right to vote is negated by actions of party leaders over whom I have little to no control...not to mention the Republican controlled State Legislature? On what planet is that consistent with representative government.

But I get it. You don't respect FL Democrats. Fine. I have a remedy for that. As I've said elsewhere, the DNC rules drones can celebrate their victory over the lawless Florida voters at President McCain's Inauguration. Of course, you'll find a scapegoat for that, too.

[Pathwalker]

8. Michigan is broke. We can't afford a do-over.

And the Democratic Party in this state thinks that fourteen or fifteen thousand voters in a caucus shouldn't over-ride the votes of several hundred thousand voters. Can't imagine why not. :sarcasm:

[LisaL]

12. Well, maybe you should come up with millions it's gonna cost.

That if the laws even allow a re-vote.

[WillyT]

14. They Were Warned What Would Happen, They Went And Did It Anyway...

If they want to count the votes, pony-up the money and do it again.

I have no problems with the delegates going to the convention, They can vote on everything EXCEPT the Nomination.

Have a platform fight all ya want, but NO SAY in who the nominee is, without a LEGITIMATE vote!

:shrug:

[NastyRiffraff]

11. It's a mess, and there's no easy solution.

There's no doubt that FL and MI knowingly and purposefully violated DNC rules when they set their primary dates. The irony is, of course, that had they held their primaries later, they would have been very important players. Dean and the DNC are right to stick to their guns; it would set a terrible precedent to allow these states to ignore the rules and allow the primaries to stand. The states were told time and time again that if they insisted on moving up their primaries delegates would NOT be seated. I'm a Hillary supporter, and I disagree with her on this one.

However...I think everybody but the most rabid Obama supporters agrees that MI and FL delegates and the voters need to be represented. Dean clearly wants that. How this will be accomplished remains to be seen; again there are no easy answers. Both states have rejected the do-overs, mostly for cost reasons, which are significant.

As for the voters, I feel for them; although they were told that the primaries would have no weight, still they voted. They do need to be represented, but not by the primaries that were held. Many did vote anyway, in force, but many who would have voted stayed home because of the non-representative vote. Who would have won had the states held to the primary rules? Unknown; my guess would be Hillary in FL, unknown in MI. The tragedy is that if FL and MI had obeyed the rules they had signed off on we wouldn't be facing this mess. Voters would be fairly represented, and delegates would be seated.

I know that Dean, the entire DNC, and both candidates want a solution. I understand they are working towards one that will, if not satisfy everyone, at least be some sort of compromise that will allow delegates to be seated...something everyone wants. It's not a good situation, and will end up with no one being completely happy.

[grantcart]

13. There is a very easy solution now that we are down to two parties

give each candidate half. The states will be represented and included but they will have no voice in deciding the outcome - a proper punishment for trying to hijack the process.

[WillyT]

16. Hmm... That Might Actually Work

Call it a draw (wash) in both states. Equal delegates to both Clinton and Obama.

Hmm...

What do we do with the "2nd Tier Candidate" delegates, and the uncommitted?

:shrug:

[Window]

19. Sounds good to me.

It's the best thing to a solution I've heard to date.




Peace:thumbsup:

[Birthmark]

21. That's bullshit.

Obama isn't entitled to half of FL's delegates. Award the delegates proportionally or don't bother. I'll remember in November...and so will you when McCain carries FL.

[yewberry]

24. That's exactly the attitutde the state parties were counting on

when they started this crap. It's blackmail, plain & simple.

[WillyT]

25. They're Just Gaming The System... "Say And Do ANYTHING To Win" !!!

What else is new?

:shrug:

[Birthmark]

36. Then the DNC got played by them

Because it worked. My first allegiance is to civil rights, not the DNC and its petty pecker contest with the state party.

No FL delegates, no FL Electoral Votes. The DNC can do the math and figure out how helpful that will be to the Democratic Party.

[yewberry]

38. It's not the DNC that's getting played,

it's every other Democratic voter in the goddamned country. Remember us? The ones that FL & MI decided they were more important than? WE'RE the ones being held hostage, and that's just fine with you "because it worked."

So, we get to sit back and watch and FL & MI choose to put another republican in the White House rather than follow the rules or (heaven forbid) compromise. And for what? A massive display of self-importance?

[WillyT]

39. BINGO !!!

That's it exactly !!!

:yourock:

[Birthmark]

46. If Bingo! means "nonsense" then you are correct.

Otherwise, you need to explain how FL and MI moving up their primaries harms *anyone* else in a substantive way. And it had better be damned substantive if the penalty is going to be the disenfranchisement of FL's and MI's Democrats.

Even Bush didn't disenfranchise as many Americans.

[Birthmark]

42. Not for self-importance

For our fundamental right to have our votes count. I completely fail to see how you are "held hostage" by that right. My voting on the date prescribed by the State Legislature had absolutely no effect on your rights whatsoever.

And I realize that the word "compromise" has been debased quite a bit in the last seven years, so I'll remind you that a compromise has to be approved by ALL parties in a dispute.

So if the DNC wants to be pig-headed about an arbitrary rule that was completely unnecessary and disenfranchise FL voters, then yes, the DNC (and America) is going to pay with a McCain Presidency. Disenfranchising people should come at a high price. The highest possible price.

Incidentally, I'd believe the DNC's hand wringing if they were to deprive FL of its superdelegates. After all, those are the people who had the best chance to change things to comply with the DNC's delicate sensibilities. But, nope. Those superdelegates will be seated. Instead, the DNC took away the votes of those who are weakest. I suggest that they drop the "D". Screwing over the weak is not a traditional value of the Democratic Party.

Frankly, I never thought I'd see the day when Democrats would argue for disenfranchising their fellow Americans and fellow Democrats. And for such a trivial reason at that.

Guess the DNC really, really wants a McCain Presidency. (It would make some sense, too.)

[yewberry]

55. You're being deliberately obtuse.

Your state party made a decision knowing full well that it could disenfranchise its own constituency. It did so out of self-importance and hunger for power. I suggest you take that up with Bill Nelson & Co, because they're the folks who did this to you.

I'd say you know perfectly well how the rest of the country is being held hostage by the FL Dems. After all, you yourself posted, "I'm sure you'll enjoy President McCain" and "...Bite me! No FL delegates at the Convention, no vote in November." Your state party counted on you to back their ridiculous power-grab and it's now relying on you to threaten the rest of the country with a McCain win. Congrats. So, if we don't give in to the FL & MI demands, you'll vote for a war pig and abandon constitutional restoration. Way to go, FDP!

Don't bother to try to school me about compromise...the FDP was offered time and financial help. They didn't want it. They wanted to say FU to Dean, the DNC, and and every other Democrat in the country. And why? Self-importance.

If you really think the DNC is being pig-headed about an "arbitrary rule" then please ask yourself why your state party felt that it was so important to break that "arbitrary rule" for such a "trivial reason" that they would cause the disenfranchisement of its own constituency. The rest of the country shouldn't have to pay with a McCain presidency because your state party thinks they're more important the rest of the country.

I think the FDP is reveling in this. They're the reason for it, and they'll be to blame if FL goes red. And yes, I completely blame them, and people like you.

[JVS]

59. waaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

[Birthmark]

61. Save that.

You'll need it come November.

[in_cog_ni_to]

34. No. Obama didn't win HALF of the votes. He CHOSE to take his name off the ballots in Fl. and Mi. No

one held a gun to his head to do that. He chose it. It cannot have Hillary's votes.

[LisaL]

49. His name was on the ballot in FL.

Hillary easily won FL, but Obama's name was on the ballot.
On MI, Obama's voters could have voted un-committed.
So, both states could seat delegates according to results. I suppose un-committed should go to Obama, in which case he would still get more delegates than voted for him in MI, since at that time Edwards was still running.

[nonconformist]

15. People need to wake up - this is about more than the primary.

Florida is always a key swing state, and Michigan is in a world of hurt. People are PISSED about this. I've spoken with many people in MI who say that if their votes don't count, they're either staying home or voting McCain in November, because obviously the Democrats don't care about their votes.

If we want to win the GE, if that's is really our main goal, count the fucking votes.

[WillyT]

17. Does Post #13 Work For You ???

I'd never considered that option.

Just mulling it over now.

:shrug:

[bain_sidhe]

30. Eh.

I'm vicerally against rewarding Obama when he chose to take his name off the ballot.

But I wouldn't fight it to the death if that's the solution people want with. It would still leave the bad taste in my mouth though, which means--if my feelings are as widespread as I think they are (always a question, of course)--enthusiasm (as I noted below) wouldn't be at the high-level needed to keep this state in the "blue" part of the electoral college.

[Pathwalker]

22. "The Democrats don't care about their votes".

Yes, that is the sentiment here in Michigan - the voters are pissed AT THE DEMOCRATS. Not the Michigan Democratic Party, not the DNC, not even Dean. Nope. It's ALL Democrats, thanks especially to the Republican legislators going on TV every night mocking "The Democrats". Party activists can scream and threaten to leave the party all they want if the voters of Michigan are given a voice, but those numbers are downright paltry compared to the numbers of voters who have already deserted the party. If those votes don't count, Michigan will go RED in November. I know one party (state-level) activist who has already quit being a Democrat - he changed his party affiliation, and will sit out November rather than "vote for a Democrat who won't let our votes count". Oh, yeah - they're already pissed.And the "rules are rules" argument just makes them even angrier.

[bain_sidhe]

29. And I'm seeing (and feeling myself) an even more specific

"Obama (and Edwards and Biden, but they don't matter, now) doesn't care about our votes." I don't know what that will do to the enthusiasm/commitment of the activists whose work we're all counting on in the general. Speaking for myself, I will of course vote and probably work for Obama if he's the nominee, but I can't deny a certain lack of enthusiasm in my support for a guy who threw us under the bus to pander to Iowa.

**edited for typo**

[in_cog_ni_to]

32. HEY, FLORIDIANS!!!! Hear that? You're MEANINGLESS!

How's that make you feel? You voted and now the Obama camp is calling your vote MEANINGLESS!

[NJObamaWoman]

40. My family members are from Florida and many of them did not vote.

While I'm not from florida I must say that a do over is necessary. There are probably people (people like my family members) who did not get the chance to vote because they were told their vote doesn't count because of the rules therefore they didn't waste their time.

[arewenotdemo]

43. Jesus H. Christ. I can't wait until Barack pounds the final nail in her

campaign's coffin.

"I think that the people of Michigan and Florida spoke in a very convincing way, that they want their voices and their votes to be heard," Clinton told reporters. "The turnout in both places was record-breaking and I think that that should be respected."

Total. Fucking. Bullshit.

[WillyT]

44. Then You're Gonna LOVE This One...

Clinton Aide Changes Mich., Fla. Stance

<snip>

WASHINGTON (AP) — Harold Ickes, a top adviser to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign who voted to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates last year, now is arguing against the very penalty he helped pass.

In a conference call Saturday, the longtime Democratic Party member contended the DNC should reconsider its tough sanctions on the two states, which held early contests in violation of party rules. He said millions of voters in Michigan and Florida would be otherwise disenfranchised — before acknowledging moments later that he had favored the sanctions.

Ickes explained that his different position essentially is due to the different hats he wears as both a DNC member and a Clinton adviser in charge of delegate counting. Clinton won the primary vote in Michigan and Florida, and now she wants those votes to count.

"There's been no change," Ickes said. "I wasn't acting as an agent for Mrs. Clinton. We stripped them of all their delegates in order to prevent campaigns to campaign in those states. ...Those were the rules, and we thought we had an obligation to enforce them."

Clinton won after all the Democratic candidates agreed not to campaign in either states because they violated the party rules. Clinton, who flew into Florida on primary-eve but did not hold a public rally, tried to argue that Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois had violated the pledge by airing a national ad campaign that also showed on Florida television stations.

Ickes' dual positions on the issue illustrates some of the internal division within the party as Clinton and Obama run neck-in-neck in the Democratic presidential race. Civil rights leaders also have been somewhat split on whether seating the Florida and Michigan delegates would unfairly disenfranchise minority voters.

<snip>

Link: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hY742M_s1ttD_ycf2Zusn1o1fD3QD8URL34G0

:wtf:

Triagulator extrordanaire, eh ???

:shrug:

[arewenotdemo]

53. Thanks for the link. Sure would suck to be a Clinton supporter and read this.

Gotta be a bitch to look at yourself in the mirror and soldier on.

[Birthmark]

48. Poor Obamalings!

Can't see past the convention. Obama will lose FL (and maybe MI) if the DNC disenfranchises us. Better get off DU and on some strategy that will allow Obama to win without them.

And you might want to think how the Republicans might play the disenfranchisement come GE time. The DNC's lunatic devotion to a silly rule might very well bite them in another swing state or two.

If you really want Obama to win, then your best course is to call the DNC and tell them to seat the delegates. If they are not seated, Obama loses in the GE.

[Cha]

47. Obama's 6 year old daughter

would understand but hilary and bil's daughter thinks we were all "clairvoyant" knowing that hilary should have voted "NO" on the IWR.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4616200