Be Careful What You Wish For...

[AnnieBW]

I have a feeling that the re-vote in Michigan and Florida is not going to go the way that HRC wants it to. Especially in Michigan, where Obama's name wasn't on the ballot. I think that's why HRC is pushing so hard for the original results to be certified and those delegates seated. There's a very real probability that Obama could win Michigan. Also, the voters in Florida that voted for Edwards could break either way.

This has the possibility to get even uglier.

[jillan]

1. So what - at least we will know for sure.

[hedgehog]

3. Are you feelin' lucky?

Well are you?

[jillan]

16. Until EITHER candidate reaches 2025, they are not the nominee.

[tridim]

4. We already know "for sure" that Hillary can not win the nomination

There is no need to waste any more money just to stroke Hillary's massive ego.

[LakeSamish706]

8. Yep, but try and convince the Hillary supporters of that. n/t

[joshcryer]

12. Neither can win without superdelegates

Please stop deluding yourself.

[Dinger]

2. Why Did Obama Choose To Leave His Name Off In Michigan?

Honest question. An honest answer would be appreciated.

[hedgehog]

5. He removed his name as did Biden, Edwards and Richardson when the

primary was scheduled ahead of the February 5 DNC sanctioned opening date. Kucinich tried several times to remove his name but couldn't assemble the proper paperwork. I don't know what the story was with Dodd.

Names were not removed from the Florida ballot because Florida does not allow names to be removed.

[Nickster]

6. Because I think the spirit of the agreement was that they would all leave their names off the ballot

even though it wasn't specifically etched in stone that they would. It was a shrewd move to keep HRC's name on the ballot even though I think it went against the spirit of the agreement that all the Dem candidates agreed to.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Why do people keep asking this?

The party told all of the candidates that what MI & FL had done was against the Party officials agreement and their delegates would not be seated. And in the case of FL, their state law required that if the candidates wanted their names on a GE ballot, then the name had to remain on the primary ballot, but no such state law existed for MI. So Obama and others removed their names to underscore that they were following the Party's wishes.

The question you should ask is why a supposed Party member named Hillary Clinton, chose to go against her Party's wishes? IMHO, she should be kicked out of the Party for not being a loyal Party member.

[Dinger]

10. No, She Shouldn't Be Kicked Out Of The Party

She had the right to do this, just as Obama had the right not to.

[movonne]

14. Sure she had the right to do it...but they can't count them period...

[BumRushDaShow]

15. What "right" are you talking about?

You know, for the first time in my life, and this is my 8th Presidential election, I actually finally understood the concept of "Party". I mean, I took my registration for granted and because I never really participated in all the machinations of it, I just didn't think about it beyond the superficiality of selecting candidates to vote for who were running under that "Party".

I mean, I always chuckled when people would talk about being a "card-carrying member of the Communist Party". But really, THAT is what we ARE when it comes to the Democratic Party. We are "card-carrying members of the Democratic Party". It is an organization... like a "club". And it has rules. This whole thing with FL & MI opened my eyes to it - especially thanks to reading the posts on this site.. It was like a lightning bolt moment and I still haven't really recovered from this revelation. I have been voting for 28 years and I am just now "getting it".

And basically what it means is, if you don't like the rules, then you leave... And this is probably why there are alot of folks out there who are either "unaffiliated" or who are registered "Independent". They either did not agree with a particular "club's" ("Party's") rules and/or they wanted the freedom to participate in elections on their own terms, crossing party lines if they wished. Of course others are registered "Republican" or "Communist" or "Green" or "Consumer", etc. and those folks follow the rules of their Party.

[Kittycat]

11. Several of the candidates did in unity, to support the DNC's wishes.

[jillan]

17. Because it was the right thing to do at the time.

[Drachasor]

18. Because they agreed to not campaign or PARTICIPATE in the election

[amborin]

9. no, your scenario suggest sitch gets resolved faster and does not get ugly

[cooolandrew]

13. That is why I have said please re-vote. Sounds good to me.

[sueragingroz]

19. If she loses FL and MI fair and square then so be it.

I don't want Hillary to take the Democratic nod unfairly.