The BIG BIG Lie - Clinton was against disenfranchising Florida and Michigan

[grantcart]

The crocodile tears that are now being shed about Florida and Michigan are the latest and most disingenuous of the Clinton campaign. The fact is that the idea of drawing a line in the sand so that you would end up with a de facto national primary was from page one of the Clinton playbook.

Having twenty or thirty states vote on the same day, the theory went, would favor the candidate with the most money, the most experience and the most organizational support with connections with many local governors and mayors already on board.

This strategy would only work if, repeat if, there was a draconian line in the sand. If the line was too weak - like 50% representation then states would be tempted to be in the head of the line and settle for half of the delegates. Even with the draconian line two states called the bluff (and as Madfloridian has proved they did it laughing at the DNC).

This is what their representatives wanted and Harold Ickes was on the committee and voted for it. Clinton's strongest base of support is not with the elected super delegates but the DNC delegates that control the party machinery where she locked up 140 early endorsements.

By November everything looked great for the Clintons. They got the ironclad rule with the draconian penalty that they needed. Twenty Four primaries and caucuses took the bait and jumped to the front of the line for Super Super Tuesday on Feb 5th. The other element that they hoped for was a big field of candidates. As long as there was a big field then the Clinton had a solid 40% the other candidates would split the rest and the Clintons would win big.

And then the plan began to unravel. The field ended up being only three candidates. In the first contest, Iowa Clinton finished third place. By the time Super Super Tuesday came that 40%+ ended up being not just a floor but also a ceiling. The Clinton campaign had banked everything on February 5th. They had no real plan for the caucus states and low on money. The junior senator from Illinois won in delegates and popular votes and then launched 12 straight victories.


Now as the last 15% of the primary season is upon us and being irretrievably behind the Clinton camp will bang the drum of injustice for the exclusion of Michigan and Florida. The big lie is that they are now painting themselves as having been absolutely against the injustice. The truth was having a draconian penalty was key to making sure that a huge number of states would line up one a single date. It looked like a good idea up to Feb 4th.

Now as the dust settles over the non snipers and the shameless self promotion we are treated to a really skilled prevaricator. As the falsehood of the Clinton position is heaped on an unsuspecting public day after day, as the Clintons beat the drum of Florida and Michigan you only can admire such professional deception - too bad we don't have a youtube of the DNC meetings.




(edit to change Lanny Davis to Harold Ickes as per kind reminder of poster down thread)

[NanceGreggs]

1. Excellent work, grantcart!

:applause:

[grantcart]

4. cookie time

[NanceGreggs]

7. I think you earned the entire cookie jar ...

... with this one!

[grantcart]

69. of course when I say 'cookie' I actually mean

whiskey and coke - perhaps the whole jar would be imprudent lol

[grantcart]

46. Madfloridian has added the famous video showing how Florida laughed

at the 'draconian line in the sand'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpHuQi17EaE


How many other states would have jumped the line and had Jan primaries if the penalty was 50% of the delegates. The Clintons had to make it tough to have super super Tuesday.

[papau]

19. Unfortunately she was kelping/backing DNC - was rewarded by Dean not doing 50% delegates but

rather screwing her.

[grantcart]

60. you may want to retype your reply I can't understand it

[papau]

77. The "standard" punishment for Dems was same as for GOP = loss of half of delegates - Dean screwed Hi

[rateyes]

85. What the hell are you smoking?

Hillary was the one that wanted to unseat 100% of the delegates. Her supporters brought it up, and then voted FOR it. It was a committee decision, not Dean's. And, the committee majority were Hillary's supporters at the time.

Cheese on a cracker.

[grantcart]

119. your reply actually makes my argument stronger

I don't know if it was a standard punishment or not.

But there was only one candidate that benefitted from making the punishment stronger - Clinton.

[stillcool]

138. When?

Florida Dems defy Dean on primary date
By Sam Youngman
Posted: 06/12/07 07:58 PM
Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), is trapped in a high-stakes game of chicken with party leaders in Florida.
They warned him yesterday not to “disenfranchise” state voters and risk being blamed for a debacle on the scale of the 2000 recount.

The warning comes amid alarm over a decision Sunday by state Democratic leaders to embrace Jan. 29 as the primary date. They are defying DNC headquarters and daring it to follow through on its threat to disqualify electors selected in the primary and punish candidates who campaign there.

But the DNC is not backing down. The committee bought time with a statement late yesterday saying, “The DNC will enforce the rules as passed by its 447 members in Aug. 2006. Until the Florida State Democratic Party formally submits its plan and we’ve had the opportunity to review that submission, we will not speculate further.”

Dean does not, in any case, have the power to waive party rules, a DNC spokeswoman said. The entire committee would have to vote again to do that.
------------------
Carol Fowler, chairwoman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, said she won’t move that state’s primary, scheduled for Feb. 2, unless the national committee allows her. “I’m going to do what the DNC tells me to,” Fowler said. “I’m not willing to violate the rules. The penalties are too stiff.”


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/florida-dems-defy-dean-on-primary-date-2007-06-12.html

Posted: August 27, 2007, 6:05 PM ET
DNC Moves to Stop Primary Frontloading
The Democratic National Committee moved over the weekend to penalize Florida for moving up its primary date to Jan. 29 -- a violation of DNC rules that prohibit states from holding nominating polls before Feb. 5. The committee said the Sunshine State would be stripped of its delegation at the party's National Convention in 2008 if the state does not reschedule its primary in the next 30 days.

As the nation's fourth-most-populous state, Florida has 210 delegates and has played a major role in recent presidential elections. Florida's decision to advance its primary follows the increasing trend of states pushing up their contests in order to gain relevance in the election.
"Rules are rules. California abided by them, and Florida should, as well. To ignore them would open the door to chaos," said Garry Shays, a DNC member from California. California -- with its 441 delegates -- moved its primary to Feb. 5, along with more than a dozen other states.
-----------------------------------------

The DNC gave Florida the option of holding a Jan. 29 contest but with nonbinding results, and the delegates would be awarded at a later official date.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/politics/july-dec07/florida_08-27.html

Lawmakers in US state Michigan approve moving presidential primary to January despite rules
The Associated Press
Published: August 30, 2007

LANSING, Michigan: Michigan lawmakers have approved moving the state's U.S. presidential nomination contests to January, three weeks earlier than party rules allow, as states continue to challenge the traditional primary election calendar to gain influence in the race.

Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm is expected to sign the bill passed Thursday that would move the contest to Jan. 15, but approval of the switch is far from certain. A disagreement among state Democratic leaders over whether to hold a traditional ballot vote or a more restricted caucus is complicating final action.

If the date moves up, Michigan Democrats risk losing all their national convention delegates, while Republicans risk losing half.
------------------------------------
"We understand that we're violating the rules, but it wasn't by choice," Michigan Republican Chairman Saul Anuzis said, noting that state Democrats first proposed moving the date to Jan. 15.
"We're going to ask for forgiveness and we think ... we will get forgiveness."
----------------------------------
Florida Democrats decided to move their state's primary to Jan. 29. The national party has said it will strip Florida of its presidential convention delegates unless it decides within the next few weeks to move the vote to a later date.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/31/america/NA-POL-US-Primary-Scramble.php?WT.mc_id=rssap_america

Published: Monday, September 24, 2007
Florida defies Dems, moves up primary
Associated Press
PEMBROKE PINES, Fla. — The Florida Democratic Party is sticking to its primary date — and it printed bumper stickers to prove it.
State party leaders formally announced Sunday their plans to move ahead with a Jan. 29 primary, despite the national leadership's threatened sanctions.
The Democratic National Committee has said it will strip the Sunshine State of its 210 nominating convention delegates if it doesn't abide by the party-set calendar, which forbids most states from holding primary contests before Feb. 5. The exceptions are Iowa on Jan. 14, Nevada on Jan. 19, New Hampshire on Jan. 22 and South Carolina on Jan. 29.
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20070924/NEWS02/709240045/-1/

Democrats vow to skip defiant states
Six candidates agree not to campaign in those that break with the party's calendar. Florida and Michigan, this includes you.
By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 2, 2007
The muddled 2008 presidential nomination calendar gained some clarity Saturday -- at least on the Democratic side -- as the party's major candidates agreed not to campaign in any state that defies party rules by voting earlier than allowed.

Their collective action was a blow to Florida and Michigan, two states likely to be important in the general election, which sought to enhance their clout in the nominating process as well.
Front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York followed Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina in pledging to abide by the calendar set by the
Democratic National Committee last summer. The rules allow four states -- Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina -- to vote in January.
The four "need to be first because in these states ideas count, not just money," Edwards said in a written statement. "This tried-and-true nominating system is the only way for voters to judge the field based on the quality of the candidate, not the depth of their war chest."

Hours later, after Obama took the pledge, Clinton's campaign chief issued a statement citing the four states' "unique and special role in the nominating process" and said that the New York senator, too, would "adhere to the DNC-approved calendar."

Three candidates running farther back in the pack -- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Sens. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware -- said Friday they would honor the pledge, shortly after the challenge was issued in a letter co-signed by Democratic leaders in the four early states.
--
Florida, the state that proved pivotal in the 2000 presidential election, is again a source of much upheaval. Ignoring the rule that put January off-limits, legislators moved the state's primary up to Jan. 29, pushing Florida past California and other big states voting Feb. 5.Leaders of the national party responded last month by giving Florida 30 days to reconsider, or have its delegates barred from the August convention in Denver.

"The party had to send a strong message to Florida and the other states," said Donna Brazile, a veteran campaign strategist and member of the Democratic National Committee, the party's governing body. "We have a system that is totally out of control."

Despite that warning, Michigan lawmakers moved last week to jump the queue, voting to advance the state's primary to Jan. 15.

Michigan defies parties, moves up primary date
JAN. 15 DECISION COULD SET OFF STAMPEDE OF STATES
By Stephen Ohlemacher
Associated Press
Article Launched: 09/05/2007 01:34:57 AM PDT

WASHINGTON - Michigan officially crashed the early primary party Tuesday, setting up showdowns with both political parties and likely pushing the presidential nomination calendar closer to 2007.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed a bill moving both of Michigan's presidential primaries to Jan. 15. Michigan's move threatens to set off a chain reaction that could force Iowa and New Hampshire to reschedule their contests even earlier than anticipated, perhaps in the first week in January 2008 or even December 2007.
-------------------------------------------
The national parties have tried to impose discipline on the rogue states. On the Republican side, states that schedule contests before Feb. 5 risk losing half their delegates to next summer's convention, though some are banking that whoever wins the GOP nomination will eventually restore the delegates.
Democrats have experienced similar problems, but party officials hoped they had stopped the mad dash to move up by threatening to strip Florida of all its convention delegates for scheduling a primary Jan. 29 and by persuading the major Democratic candidates to campaign only in the party-approved early states.

The decision by the major Democratic candidates to campaign only in approved early states renders voting in the rogue states essentially non-binding beauty contests.
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_6804685?source=rss

Kucinich Files Affidavit To Remove Name From Michigan's Primary Shortly Before Deadline

October 10, 2007 8:19 a.m. EST
Ayinde O. Chase - AHN Staff
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7008781843
Dover, NH (AHN) - The Kucinich for President campaign Tuesday afternoon officially requested that Kucinich's name be withdrawn from the Michigan Democratic primary ballot. The affidavit came by way of to the Michigan Secretary of State's office.The Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidates
National Campaign manager Mike Klein said in the statement, "We signed a public pledge recently, promising to stand with New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina, and the DNC-approved 'early window', and the action we are taking today protects New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary status, and Nevada's early caucus."
The statement continued: "We support the grassroots nature of the New Hampshire, small-state primary, and we support the diversity efforts that Chairman Dean and the DNC instituted last year, when they added Nevada and South Carolina to the window in January 2008. We are obviously committed to New Hampshire's
historic role." Klein who actually recently moved to Dover said, "We will continue to adhere to the DNC-approved primary schedule."

Governor Granholm and other Michigan Democratic leaders have openly criticized the decision by several presidential candidates to keep their names off the state primary ballot. The Michigan lawmakers are taken back by Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Edwards and Bill Richardson's decision to withdraw their names from the January 15th ballot.

The only ones who remain on Michigan's primary ballot are Hillary Clinton, Mike Gravel and Chris Todd.

December 1, 2007, 11:42 am
Democrats Strip Michigan of Delegates
By The New York Times

In a widely expected move, the Democratic National Committee voted this morning to strip Michigan of all its 156 delegates to the national nominating convention next year. The state is the party’s rules by holding its primary on Jan. 15. Only Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada are allowed to hold contests prior to Feb. 5.
The party imposed a similar penalty on Florida in August for scheduling a Jan. 29 primary.
The Democratic candidates have already pledged not to campaign in the state, and Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr., as well as John Edwards and Gov. Bill Richardson, asked to have their names removed from the state ballot.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/01/democrats-strip-michigan-delegates/

Editorial: Follow DNC rules on seating delegates
February 25, 2008
By Editorial Board

On September 1, the campaigns of Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) issued press releases stating that they had signed pledges affirming the DNC’s decision to approve certain representative states and sanction others for moving their nominating contests earlier. But now that the race is close, Clinton — whose top advisor Harold Ickes voted as a member of the DNC to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates — is pushing for the delegates to be seated.
Her argument is that not doing so disenfranchises the 1.7 million Florida Democrats who voted and that her pledge promised only that she wouldn’t campaign in the states, not that she wouldn’t try to seat the delegates. However, the results of the contests in Florida and Michigan are not necessarily representative of the voters’ preferences in those states. Given that most of the candidates removed their names from the
Michigan ballot, and that many voters stayed home from the vote in Florida with the understanding that their contest would not affect the final delegate count, the delegate totals that the candidates accumulated in these states may not accurately reflect the will of the voters. Had there been no restrictions in Michigan and Florida, the turnout, and thus the results, may have been different.

The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar...

Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) recently said that the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if they would decide the nomination. Other compromise proposals include holding new nominating contests in these states, but such contests would be expensive and cumbersome. The irony is that had Florida and Michigan not moved up their primaries, they would have voted in February and March, when they would have been even more important than in earlier months in determining the Democratic nominee — and would not have created an enormous controversy that has the potential to divide the party.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/2/25/editorialFollowDncRulesOnSeatingDelegates

[grantcart]

140. great now it has all the dotted i s and crossed ts

[rateyes]

83. delete...replied to wrong poster.

[Greyskye]

78. please don't drive in your current state

[crankychatter]

2. Not on Ballot - No campaigning - All agreed - revote refused by States involved

Because Clinton operatives in those State Legislatures wanted a skewed result favoring their candidate.

This is Obama's fault, how?

THEY DIDN'T WANT A FAIR ELECTION

[grantcart]

53. and we now have the video of the Florida legislature's capricious acts

I am not sure that they were working for anybody at that point

[Rosa Luxemburg]

3. Someone will have records of the DNC meeting that decided FL and Mich

What exactly did Clinton say about FL and Mich in th ebeginning?

[MaineDem]

56. C-SPAN covered the meetings

I wonder if they have them archived?

[grantcart]

61. Does anybody know how to search their archives?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

71. they probably do

[Rosa Luxemburg]

72. Her is it on CSPAN

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=200652-1&highlight=florida

Cspan search 'Florida'

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[grantcart]

10. or we could just play by the rules and after it is settled bring Florida and Michigan

back in with a slap on the wrist.

I suspect you prefer the drum banging.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Usrename]

32. The prophet Orwell called it double-think.

The way you can argue out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.

How do you square Clinton's calling for the superdelegates to overrule the voters with this arguement?

Feigned outrage over voter disenfranchisement in two states out of one side of the mouth, while rooting and cheering for the disenfranchisememnt of the entire country out of the other side.

[FlyingSquirrel]

38. Exactly. Doublethink.

[grantcart]

42. And they are really really good at it. You will be seating there thinking

hell that makes sense and then wham you have to admit it they got you again. lol

[FatDave]

97. And all the while they call Obama supporters a cult

:eyes:

[Shae]

44. It isn't just the superdelegates either

Apparently she's got her eye on the pledged delegates too. She's mentioned them more than once.

[dbmk]

55. Or..

..how caucus delegates are somehow not really democratic - while superdelegates, that are basically one man caucuses, are oh, so fine.

[grantcart]

66. excellent point

[asthmaticeog]

79. The lesser prophet asthmaticeog calls it "being on crack."

[Usrename]

84. That sums it all up pretty well.

:rofl:

[CoffeeCat]

87. The even lesser prophet Twosparkles calls it...

.."behaving like a complete assclown sociopath while believing that most
Americans are no smarter than a bag of wet socks."

[bigbrother05]

49. Just like the Clinton campaign complained about Obama's nat'l TV ad

While HRC was attending "fund raisers" across FL ahead of the primary. Of course the rest of the country didn't notice that all the local FL media covered her every move as "news", so she wasn't campaigning in the state.

Pretty good tactics, take the pledge along with the other candidates, then carry on with activities that carefully avoid being personally penalized.

[grantcart]

63. Obama is not shutting down anything.

Clinton wanted the rule and wanted it enforced so that she could benefit from one large primary.

The states played chicken. Please see the video before you further embarass yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpHuQi17EaE

Now the politicians and Clinton are trying to rewrite history and the rule book to salvage themselves.

Obama has offered to negotiate a compromise that does not favor one side over the other.

Legalities and legal rulings have made revoting impossible - neither state has forwarded a plan to the DNC for revoting.

Once Obama has secured the nomination a compromise delegation will be selected for both states.

Clinton will continue to beat the drum for a revote that no one is now advocating to help divert people from her disgraceful lies about her trip to Bosnia.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

111. where's that ignore button for the willfully delusional? Ah, there it is.

[People4Change]

123. Can't let you get away with this one.

I live in FL and can tell you the reason the state didn't do a revote was for the following reasons, NONE were because of Obama:
1) Republicans that control the FL legislature didn't want a revote and FL has a budget deficit so can't pay for one.
2) FL Democrats TURNED DOWN the opportunity to do a caucus.
3) Even if private money paid for a revote, MANY counties are switching over from the infamous electronic voting machines to paper trail machines per new state law and do not have a means for voters to vote!
4) A mail in vote was discounted as impossible as the state had no way to verify the signatures.

STICK TO TOPICS YOU KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT. :grr:

[grantcart]

124. you should do your own OP on it thanks

[DrDan]

103. yeah - that's a great idea

piss off the Florida voters a bit more . . .

How about punishing the leaders of the party and let the voters vote.

[40ozDonkey]

115. Many of us in Florida believe in personal responsibility.

How about we punish the state party leaders with our votes?

[DrDan]

125. well - that is ok - I have no problem with that . . .

I am in Florida also . . . and I believe in personal responsibility . . . .

I guess that is why I do not believe I should be disenfranchised. I was disenfranchised through the actions of the state leaders. Punish them That is fine with me. I believe my vote should count. It was a crappy rule - taking away the voting voice of the Fl and Mich D's based on the actions of others.

[40ozDonkey]

127. The DNC reached out several times to the FL DNC...

Mostly, all they asked was a "good faith effort" to reach compliance.
A good faith effort would mean, for example, voting against the measure that moved forward the primaries. Sure, it would pass anyway, but the DNC rules allow for leniency once an attempt for compliance was made.

All but one voted for moving our primary, anyway.

Here's what gets me the most - did ANY state Democrats ever send you an e-mail, letter, flyer, robo-call, ANYTHING, asking for your personal input? Why should I care that Florida gets to vote earlier? Why is that important to anybody but politicians? Now that Jeremy Ring (the Dem who introduced the legislation to push forward the primary) has cost me my vote, I should give a pass to the people who crafted this disaster and made no effort to fix it? And focus my anger on the rulemakers?

We were played for dupes by our state party, and they're hoping we get mad at the DNC instead of them. No dice.

[DrDan]

128. I fault both

the DNC should never have allowed such a rule anyway. There should not be a rule to disenfranchise voters for actions beyond their control. The Democratic charter clearly states equal opportunity for voting - and further states there can be no rules that violate the basic foundations. The DNC and the states violated that.

They need to get this resolved before the convention - and fairly to the voters. No 50% bs. Both sides need to swallow their pride and resolve it. Until then - there is certainly no financial support from me - nor votes for the DNC nominee. I will not vote GOP, but I will vote - for my choice.

[CTLawGuy]

130. how SHOULD the DNC enforce its rules?

how else COULD it? Remember it is going up against the state of Florida. Or do you believe there should be no rules and have a national primary on Jan 3rd?

[DrDan]

135. I really don't care when we have the primary - or whether or not it fits into a national picture

I think let the states do their own thing. I do not think it is going to lead to chaos as everyone predicts. As I see these forecasts of chaos and anarchy, I keep thinking about the reich-wing and their arguments against same-sex marriage - that it will lead to people wanting to marry their pets. Ridiculous - and I feel the same way about the DNC trying to dictate when the states should have their primaries. Why? I see no reason for it. It is just a power play between the national DNC and the state leaders.

How should the DNC enforce rules? I don't know - fine the state party - or withhold financial assistance. For sure - do not take away the right to vote. That should be untouchable.

[Capn Sunshine]

108. And make an appearance on Faux News to catapult that propaganda

because no one does it better than Faux. Ask Hillary's favorite fundraiser

[meow mix]

6. K&R

great post

[goclark]

36. Another great post grantcart ~ two bad a few have eyes wide shut

but the huge majority of us "get it."

:bounce:

k and R

[grantcart]

43. thanks for all of your support

[HCE SuiGeneris]

8. An excellent opinion piece. It would be valuable to circulate this truth through the blogs.

The sooner we can coalesce, the better.

[JKaiser]

9. This post doesn't help our party, it only divides us further.. Stop it!

[grantcart]

12. It is Hillary that should stop it my friend. She is on the TV every day

crying about the injustice and trying to change the rules that she wanted. I understand that you are angry at the fighting but please understand that those of us that have fought for Obama ehtically and with dignity are not going to be turned away.

If you have some other facts or an alternative version fine..

We are not going to shut up and go away - we are going to defend our candidate against those that try and reinvent the rules after the game has played.

And if necessary I am prepared to take my family to the streets of Denver to show how deeply I feel.

I regret that your candidate has put you in the position your in, but please direct your anger at her - she is the one that should stop this line of attack. It, like Bosnia is a lie.

[JKaiser]

16. Who cares if she does! We need to attack the republicans..

[Shae]

33. Yeah, good plan.

Someone should let Hillary in on it.

[wileedog]

13. I think its a valid and terrific analysis

of one of the worst planned and executed campaigns in recent history. I mean, just awful from a foresight standpoint to a complete and total breakdown in any rational goals at the end.

There are going to be books written about this debacle in the not too distant future, but the OP boiled it all down beautifully into a few paragraphs.

Well done. K&R

[grantcart]

68. they are going to need to hurry and shut it down if they are going to sign the deals

write the books and get them out by November when they will maximize their profits. lol

[HCE SuiGeneris]

14. Not true.

Hillary has chosen the path of divide and conquer by spewing untruths (lies), as it is the only possible venue wherein she might "win".

This OP is useful to remediate her false claims.

[JKaiser]

15. Obama and Hillary fans need to calm down.. We the people are the ones that vote! Negative

posts divide us further.. Not good for our party

[grantcart]

21. This is not a picnic. Almost a million men and women have died so that

we can choose our government. That choice means that great power will soon be changing hands. Who has that power is important.

But how that power is to be acquired is also important.

I cannot tell you how grateful that we have a candidate who has set himself to take a different path, one that he does imperfectly.

The least I can do is when I see the lies aimed at him is to speak up.

What I have said is fair. We must speak frankly. The Clintons lie. Bill lies and Hillary lies.

And now I have sat listening to her everyday as the drum gets louder MICHIGAN - FLORIDA - MICHIGAN - FLORIDA.

It makes me sick because I know that they wanted the rule in order to create the huge national primary. Just like they said that it

was all about the delegates after Iowa (when everyone had the same number of delegates) they then changed to the popular vote when

they could not win the delegate vote. This Clinton spinfest is not going to stop - I know that. But my good friend do not ask

me too sit by and watch it without speaking. This I cannot do.

[JKaiser]

25. Attacking dems only divides our party.

[grantcart]

35. Exposing their lies does help the party it makes us different

Clinton is attacking Obama and she is lying when she does so. Tell her to stop it.

[goclark]

47. Nail on head ~ she is a train wreak

and coming full speed ahead.

She is a very smart lady and she really doesn't have to act like a Republican. We have 8 long years of this kind of politics and we are simply tired of it.

I admired her the other way,this "my way or the high way " is way out of line.

It just doesn't fit for the 21st Century.

How she must look to the new voters. :crazy:

[CoffeeCat]

88. That's like a dysfunctional family...

...suggesting that we shut our mouths and ignore abuse and degrading behavior--in order
to preserve harmony and give the appearance of unity.

That's a really sick way of behaving, and that go-along-to-get-along mentality enables and strengthens dysfunctional
people---and muzzles those who seek fairness and justice.

Remaining silent--while dishonesty, corruption and amoral behavior happens all around you--is
behaving like a cowed, spineless hack who stands for nothing.

I'd rather fight for what is right and end up with a healthier result--rather than quietly going along while perversity
metastasizes and wins the day.

[FatDave]

99. Some would argue...

...that there are certain factions that need to be divided clear out of the party.

Edit for clarity: I did not choose "some would argue" phrasing to be wishy washy. Some really would. Myself, I'm not sure it needs to come to that. But I'm starting to worry that it might.

[dmr]

106. Oh, stop it

I want these discussions. No matter who it is.

The divisiveness begins and ends in the Hillary camp. No where else.

The Hillary people would like nothing better than for Americans to shut up and allow them to continue their underhanded game plans. Heaven forbid we are intelligent enough to see (and discuss) right through their tactics.

Until last week, I never, ever spoke against another Democrat. From her behavior in this campaign, Hillary has proven to me she is more like the GOP than any Democrat I've ever known. If the shoe was on the other foot where she was leading, she would be unmerciful toward Obama for hanging on to a losing campaign and dividing not only the party but the country too. Don't tell me she wouldn't, because we all know she would.

I want to know why she is trying so hard - at any cost - to win this election. Just like the Coup 2000, where Bush* had to win at all costs. We know what that has done to this country. To whom and what has she promised if she were to become president? I think it is far more than we will ever know.

I shudder to think what else these people have up their sleeves. There was a time only the GOP made me shudder and my blood boil like this. Shame on them.

[Vattel]

95. oh brother

obama wants to disenfranchise Florida and Michagan voters. Thtat's the bottom line about Obama here regardless of what sins one can unsympathetically attribute to HRC.

[MagickMuffin]

17. Why don't you call or contact the Clinton Campaign and TELL them to STOP IT?.?.?

They continue to drum this issue day in and day out.

So, take your own advice and tell the Clinton Campaign to STOP IT. This is dividing us further.

Thanks in advance.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

22. I approve this message!

not that that means squat, but... :thumbsup:

[JKaiser]

29. Does it matter? Hillary cannot win! What is all the whining about?

I love Hillary and Obama. I will support who ever wins! They are both great democrats. If Obama was behind in everything, wouldn't you want him to do everything possible to try and win? Anyway, We need to get angry about McCain he is the enemy! McCain can make all democratic dreams die.. Why are we fighting against our own people...

[grantcart]

37. I am responding to Clinton's attack on Obama She is the one that is attacking

and she is lying when she does it. Just like Bosnia but without the video.

[nxylas]

64. If the positions were reversed, I'd want Obama to quit

I prefer Obama to Clinton, but if Clinton was the presumptive nominee and Obama was hurting the Democratic Party by causing Clinton to spend all her time fighting him instead of McCain, I'd want him to get out of the race now.

[goclark]

39. The Divider is not this poster ~ the Divider is Hillary

the Republican lover.

She is a trader to her own party.

[FlyingSquirrel]

40. Oooooooook whatever.

Stop the truth!

[TomBall Democrat]

81. Truth is not the enemy!

Remind the senator of that.

Truth matters.

Peace.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

11. I wish you would submit this OP at

www.OpEdNews.com

You can register to post there, then just follow the links to submit your article.

You can copy and paste your OP directly from her to the OpEdNews blogging software.

You have to give a summary, a few hundred words or less, and you have
to select meta tags, its very very easy.

I have had quite a few articles published there, and they get huge readership.

We have to get the word out to the people.

Also, I blog at www.talkingpointsmemo.com

[Tresalisa]

18. I believe that whichever of the two candidates get the nomination,

what will be written and said about what happened in campaign 2008 in the coming years will validate everything which you have written here.

Good job!

Official disclaimer: I am a supporter of whichever candidate gets the nomination. This is an example of how politics is played when a candidate wants to win.

[mrJJ]

20. Harold Ickes vote counted

Harold Ickes, a Clinton supporter, voted in August to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates as a sitting member of the Rules and Bylaws Commission .

[Rageneau]

23. This post is pure fiction. Pure speculation. Pure bullshit.

There is nothing to back up any of the contentions in this essay of one man's opinion. Somebody "thinks" they've figured something out after the fact, but nowhere in this piece of drivel does the author offer a single GOOD REASON why the Hillary campaign would WANT Florida and Michigan disenfranchised. Or, if they did, why Hillary was the only candidate to stay on the ballot in both states and to come out publically AGAINST their disenfranchisemet.

The aithor of this thing SAYS he can explain it and he starts down the road of trying to explain it, but gives up after a few yards, he gives up and says, effectively, trust me.

But there's no reason to.

There was never any advantage to Hillary Obama in disenfranchising Florida and Michigan. Obama is the one -- the ONLY one -- who benefits from that.

[grantcart]

30. The known facts are established and you will not be able to counter them

1) Clintons have by far the greatest amount of support in the DNC

2) Harold Ickes voted for the rule

3) There was no dissension in implementing the rule and Senator Clinton signed the agreement not to participate

4) Every single commentator agreed (and it is only logical to do so) that small primaries like Iowa and New Hampshire favor the insurgent and unknown candidate while a large national primary would be beneficial to a candidate who had a dominant brand, large financing and connections developed over 20 years in high office.

5) Even the Clinton campaign has admitted that they were not looking past Feb 5th and this was proved when they had to use personal financing afterwards because they didn't budget for the post Feb 5th campaign.

6) The Clintons have both established and now recently reminded us that they have no problem in either stating something that is not true or completely changing their justification for doing something.

7) The advantage for Hillary was not in disenfranchising anyone - it was making sure that there was not a long string of primaries and caucuses but too have as many as possible on a single date. Given the states ambitions to get in front there had to be draconian measures. Even with the draconian measures two states jumped knowing that they risked disenfranchisement. Madfloridian has posted the video showing the Florida lawmakers laughing while they voted.

None of the points in your reply that are contrary to my post are backed by facts.

8) Candidates do not place their names on the ballot in Florida. The secretary of state does based on that persons opinion if the candidate is a possible candidate of national interest. The candidates signed a pledge not to participate in the primary and all of them, with the exception of Hillary moved to take their names off in accordance with the pledge (Kucinich's paperwork apparently was not submitted in time and his name remained on the ballot).

[ladywnch]

89. it is NOT fiction that Hillary's, Ickes voted to strip FL an MI of their delegates

that is FACT. He was on the rules committee and voted in favor of it. Bill even acknowledges it but now says they didn't think of the consequences of the action. Taking actions without thinking of the consequences does NOT entitle you to change the rules after the fact.

She agreed to the rules and now that she needs their votes to win she wants to go back and undo the rules. It doesn't work that way. Changing the rules when they are inconvenient is a Bush administration tactic straight out of jr's playbook.

[dailykoff]

26. Please stop telling the truth!

You're hurting Hillary's feelings!!11

[Quixote1818]

27. Clinton supporters constantly point to "The Rules" when it comes to the Super Delegates

but when it comes to "The Rules" when applied to Florida and Michigan, they could care less.

[dailykoff]

28. They spent the last four years rigging every damn rule they could

and now when they lose they claim the rules are crooked. Does it get any richer?

:rofl:

[grantcart]

34. hubris goes before the fall - my favorite saying

[Lisa0825]

41. BINGO!

The rules are only "their rules" when it is convenient for them.

I happen to be someone who usually plays by the rules. I stop for traffic lights even at 3am with no traffic. I report for Jury Duty. I don't go in the express lane of the grocery store if I have more than 15 items.

I hate it when people think rules do not apply to them. It implies a sense of elitism. They are ABOVE the rules. That is the feeling I have about the Hillary campaign, and it goes right along with the "inevitability" meme. If rules stand in the way of the Inevitable One, then damn the rules to hell!

[Shae]

31. This is amazing

Dig to the roots and find nothing but rot and corruption.
I hope the young upstart will foil their plans.

[madfloridian]

45. Yep, done while laughing at the DNC. Keep this video handy...

In case you ever start feeling too sorry for FL Dem leaders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpHuQi17EaE

[Cha]

50. Thanks, mad!

[grantcart]

51. thank you

[goclark]

52. My my and Hillary blamed FL on Barack

:crazy:

[bigbrother05]

48. Thanks for your usual quality!

They keep trying to play us like stage magicians. It's all misdirection, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[phrigndumass]

54. K+R

A way with words you have. As far as I know.

[crankychatter]

57. k n r

yup

[Vinca]

58. Wow - I hadn't seen the Florida video.

It seems there was room for them to renegotiate with the Republicans, but they declined. And now they're whining. What idiots.

[grantcart]

70. it is a must see and madfloridian is a must read

what is wrong with Florida democrats? Could they act like this anywhere else and get away with it?

[LukeSkywalker]

139. Florida, political cesspool

Southern Dade County Florida helped steal the 2004 election from John Kerry. Southern Florida is where 19 hijackers found a suitably corrupt place to hide in plain site while they trained on planes for 9/11. Where airliner-bomber-terrorist Luis Posada can feel at home, protected by the Bushes. And which gave the world continuing stories of OJ Simpson, Molestateer Mark Foley... and where the FBI can hire a provacateur to pay people to be terrorists so they can be framed up(Miami 7)

So Florida... your corrupt political leadership purposely cheated AGAIN to gain influence in the presidential elections.

Stop crying about what they repeatedly were WARNED not to do... and CLEAN UP YOUR ACT!

Hold your politicians accountable!

[JTFrog]

59. K&R

[WillyT]

62. Big K & R !!!

:bounce::kick::bounce:

[slinkerwink]

65. kicking for the truth

[not_too_L8]

67. Well said...K&R

[meow mix]

73. K&R

[Scurrilous]

74. K & R

:thumbsup:

[L0oniX]

75. K&R

[vssmith]

76. I live in Michigan and

she can take our delegates and stick them where the sun doesn't shine

[HockeyMom]

98. I live in Florida

and say the same. I am also a former (sigh) New Yorker who voted for her twice. Nevermore, as the raven said.

[Major Hogwash]

80. Another outstanding post! Recommend that everyone here read it and understand it.

It wasn't fair to the electorate of those 2 states that all the shenanigans were played on them by the powers that be, but the DNC was clear about the rules a long time ago.

[milkyway]

82. Clinton wants all voters voices to be heard...so the superdelegates can then overrule them.

[grantcart]

120. lol drink . . .nose. . . spurt . . . . damn now I need a towel

[CoffeeCat]

86. Grancart...excellent...just excellent...

You laid it out beautifully.

It doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to sense that FL/MI were plotted from the beginning. However, it
does take a very astute mind to frame out the situation as you have. It was always apparent that
what happened in FL and MI was orchestrated to the benefit of Clinton. You explain it all very well
for those of us who didn't understand the behind-the-scenes machinations.

Hillary Clinton is a liar. The ease with which she lies and rolls out these pseudo-dramatic diatribes
about the horrors of disenfranchising voters in FL/MI--should have everyone in shock.

She is a consummate liar and a complete manipulator. Her endless capacity for lying to us--is no
different from Bush and the rest of the politicians who lie to us daily.

She has not one ounce of integrity.

The fact that Obama came out of nowhere, kicked her ass and thwarted her "inevitability" is just
beautiful. It is the ultimate triumph of good over evil.

[redqueen]

90. Thank you. I'm stunned that they've gotten away with trying to blame Obama for this.

[Raine]

91. THANKS for posting this

good info here. :thumbsup:

[steven88]

92. Where are your facts?

This is just smoke to hide your candidates efforts to prevent new primaries in Floida and Michigan. Fact:
Clinton had over $12M pledged to pay for new primaries in Floida and Michigan.


Obama: Nothing

[FatDave]

101. Hmmmm.....

So Hillary said "we can have a new primary, I'll even pay for it!" and Obama had a problem with that? I cant begin to imagine why! :sarcasm:

The way I heard it, Michigan was on the fence until Hillary showed up in the state. Her actions moved them from "maybe" to "no fucking way". Why do you suppose that was?

[grantcart]

121. Repeated just for you

The known facts are established and you will not be able to counter them
1) Clintons have by far the greatest amount of support in the DNC

2) Harold Ickes voted for the rule

3) There was no dissension in implementing the rule and Senator Clinton signed the agreement not to participate

4) Every single commentator agreed (and it is only logical to do so) that small primaries like Iowa and New Hampshire favor the insurgent and unknown candidate while a large national primary would be beneficial to a candidate who had a dominant brand, large financing and connections developed over 20 years in high office.

5) Even the Clinton campaign has admitted that they were not looking past Feb 5th and this was proved when they had to use personal financing afterwards because they didn't budget for the post Feb 5th campaign.

6) The Clintons have both established and now recently reminded us that they have no problem in either stating something that is not true or completely changing their justification for doing something.

7) The advantage for Hillary was not in disenfranchising anyone - it was making sure that there was not a long string of primaries and caucuses but too have as many as possible on a single date. Given the states ambitions to get in front there had to be draconian measures. Even with the draconian measures two states jumped knowing that they risked disenfranchisement. Madfloridian has posted the video showing the Florida lawmakers laughing while they voted.

None of the points in your reply that are contrary to my post are backed by facts.

8) Candidates do not place their names on the ballot in Florida. The secretary of state does based on that persons opinion if the candidate is a possible candidate of national interest. The candidates signed a pledge not to participate in the primary and all of them, with the exception of Hillary moved to take their names off in accordance with the pledge (Kucinich's paperwork apparently was not submitted in time and his name remained on the ballot).

[ecdab]

93. Good job, this episode has been far more damaging to the Democratic

Party than the praise Bill and Hillary have given to McCain (not that there was no damage there, as the video of Bill Clinton on the front page of McCain's web site can testify to). Republicans would not be taken the least bit seriously if they made the outrageous argument that Bill and Hillary have been making about Florida and Michigan - only a Democrat could successfully demoralize the voters in those states in the manner that Bill and Hillary have been doing.

Have any of you seen the crap filled emails Hillary has been bombarding people with about this topic?

People that receive those emails and don't question the validity of what they say are being led into some fairly deep water - and there are clearly some posters here at DU who have been victimized by those emails. Hillary's campaign to sabotage Michigan and Florida if she doesn't get her way has completely changed my mind about it being OK for her to stay in the race without the party elders stepping in and doing what they can to stop the bleeding wound she has inflicted upon the Democratic party.

[understandinglife]

94. Superb. 'We the People ..." sorta got in the way ...

... and we have no intention of allowing the Clinton/DLC/neoconster machine to continue to crush America.

[Vattel]

96. More BS

Nice work: Your OP says that it is a big big lie to claim that Hillary was against disenfranchising FL and MI. Then in post 30 you say, "The advantage for Hillary was not in disenfranchising anyone." Hillary couldn't predict that leaders of FL and MI would stupidly violate the rules and create this whole mess. It's reasonable to say: Look, we should have thought this through more: we shouldn't have made it possible to disenfranchise FL and MI. Obama, on the other hand, wants FL and MI disenfranchised to increase his already very good chances of winning.

[ecdab]

100. I don't see your point

The OP says that Hillary wasn't against taking away the Florida and Michigan votes if they violated DNC rules - which she wasn't at the time (do you disagree?) and that she gained no advantage in the votes being taken away, but that she did gain an advantage by trying to have the largest national primary as possible on Super-Super Tuesday, which by threatening to punish states that moved ahead of that date she could accomplish. The statement by the OP is only contradictory if you ignore part of what the OP has stated.

Also the use of the word "disenfranchise" if being used incorrectly by all sides. Voting in a primary is not a right. Independent voters are not permitted to vote in many states. Primary voting is function of party rules and party exclusions. To be disenfranchised somebody needs to be deprived of their right to vote - and since voting in a primary isn't a right at all, there can be no disenfranchisement. That is not to say that I don't think the voters in Michigan and Florida didn't get screwed - they just didn't get disenfranchised.

[elmerdem]

104. whatever it was, it was by their

state governments who voted in favor of early primaries, not the DNC, not Obama, not HRC. The goalpost is making me dizzy.

[Vattel]

107. OK,

I jumped too quickly because of the title of the post which doesn't add the qualification "if they violated DNC rules." I doubt that anyone thought that the rules would be violated and that this would lead to "disenfranchisement" of FL and MI voters. So the main point of the OP, that HRC is being a hypocrite is still B.S. Like Clinton, I think it's unfair to deny FL and MI democrats the opportunity to vote and to have that vote count. Obama doesn't seem to care about FL and MI voters being treated fairly.

[ecdab]

109. Obama wasn't jumping up and down for re-vote to happen that excluded

all his supporters that crossed over to play havoc in the GOP primary. Do you blame him for not being excited about that? It's also not a fair re-vote to do it that way. You could argue that it would be as fair as is possible at this point (I wouldn't agree) but the state court has also ruled that doing so is illegal - Obama had nothing to do with that.

[Vattel]

113. I agree

that there is no ideally fair solution to this mess (and unfortunately you can't tar and feather the party leaders in FL and MI). But regardless of what the state court ruled, Obama fought the revote idea all the way. If you can argue that a revote would be less fair than dividing the delegates evenly, I'm willing to listen.

[ecdab]

117. Fair is a subjective term, and in this case I don't see a fair solution

- there is a solution that the courts have ruled as illegal which also happens to be unfair to Obama and everybody that cast a vote for him in the 48 states that followed the rules laid out for the primaries by diminishing the value of their votes (that would be the re-vote that excludes Democrats that crossed over) and there is using some mathematical formula. The degree of fairness of that will largely depend upon how it is split and what a persons individual perspective is - but I don't think that will be fair to the people of Michigan and Florida either. They got screwed, and I fell very bad for them. I just don't see how jumping down Obama's shirt for not actively supporting a re-vote that would make many of his potential voters ineligible and that was ruled illegal solves anything or does a bit of justice to this unfortunate situation. If there was a truly fair (and legal) solution I'm reasonably sure it would have been implemented.

I think we all wish that Florida and Michigan hadn't chosen to move their primaries up at this point in time - Hillary supporters and Obama supporters alike, but we can not change the past. We can certainly choose what we will do going forward - and I've got say - one more time - that blaming Obama for this isn't fair.

[evolvingsteve]

122. I can weigh in on that....

I would say that it would be unfair to do a re-vote and more reasonable to split and seat the delegates 50/50.
Clinton campaigned in Florida after she agreed not to, and gave a hollow victory speech in Florida when she knows damn well that Obama didn't get a chance to campaign at all!
I might be more open to agreeing that Michigan should get a re-vote, but Florida is out of the question! She obviously has a lot more Name Recognition than Obama, and has been trying to look like the champion of the voters when her actions prove otherwise. With her name recognition, her fake victory speech, and her dirty tactics so far in the campaign, it would be far from fair to hold a re-vote in Florida because the voters are being Jaded by her.
Seat the delegates 50/50, that's what I say so we can ensure that nothing screwy happens during a re-vote and results are not skewed in association with how she's handled these problems.
She needs to show more integrity and not make this unfair for ALL the voters in the nation by displaying this bias within her energy and commitment toward MI/FL voters and rules that only benefit her. We have to stand up and make sure that she DOESN'T win at all costs as she's claimed. If she's REALLY wanting to be fair about things, her proposals toward the rules would obviously not be so bias in connection to her making it easier for her to win both states and the nomination.

[Debi]

102. Looks like madfloridian has a devotee!

:hi:

Good job GC!

[Fyddlestyx]

105. K & R

Excellent post.

[Road Scholar]

110. Excellent!!!! nt

[DrFunkenstein]

112. She Also Refused to Entertain The Possibility of a Caucus

Even though they would probably be simpler and cheaper to set up on such short notice.

[Lisa0825]

114. Probably because she is broke...

and caucuses favor those with the best organization. It would cost her more to be competetive in a caucus.

[grantcart]

136. there is growing evidence that she is out of money

[DesEtoiles]

116. grantcart - please update your post to include this: further evidence

http://www.votesmart.org/speech_detail.php?sc_id=338902&keyword=delegate&phrase=&contain=


IN DECEMBER OF 2007, HILLARY CONSIDERED FEBRUARY 5 (SUPER TUESDAY) THE "END OF THE CAMPAIGN".

SHE BELIEVED SHE WOULD HAVE ENOUGH DELEGATES TO WIN BY AND ON FEBRUARY 5.


Speaker: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY)
Title: Fox News "Fox and Friends First" - Transcript
Date: 12/17/2007
Letter

Fox News "Fox and Friends First" - Transcript

...


MR. DOOCY: Would you be "the comeback senator"? Would you be "the comeback gal"? Have you thought about that yet?

SEN. CLINTON: I'm going to leave that to you. You all have a great way with a turn of phrase. But what I'm going to do is to just keep working hard every day, knocking on doors, making phone calls, talking to people.

I feel very good about where we were. This has always been a challenge. I'm going to start on January 3rd with the caucuses in Iowa and go all the way until February 5th, because at the end of the campaign what you need are enough delegates to actually get you the nomination. And I believe that I will get the nomination and that I will be the next president.

[grantcart]

118. good idea

thanks

[Tarheel_Dem]

126. grantcart, it's hard to believe, but you've outdone yourself....

:toast:

[Yossariant]

129. Your opinion is wrong. Shocker!

Clinton was the last candidate to sign the pledge and did so reluctantly.

Dean is an idiot and Obamatoons wouldn't recognize the truth if it were time/date stamped and notarized:

"So -- Clinton signs the pledge. That's a surprise. Clinton's advisers yesterday were telegraphing their intention not to sign...

That's one reason why Clinton's campaign probably hesitated before signing the pledge.

The other is that Clinton's strategists disagree with the DNC about Florida's viability in the general election. Clinton's team believes she can win there; the DNC is more skeptical that Democrats can recover. Clinton doesn't want to give Republicans a heads-up there..."
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/09/the_jockeying_behind_the_four.php

[grantcart]

132. It was their policy and was voted by their rep on the DNC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_M._Ickes

Ickes was a member of the Democratic National Committee who voted in favor of stripping Florida and Michigan of their convention delegates for moving their primary dates earlier than allowed by DNC rules. He has since changed his support of these sanctions, however, calling on the DNC to reconsider its penalties.

[grantcart]

133. And here is proof that Ickes was working for Clinton at the time as a key adviser

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701860.html
Democrats' Data Mining Stirs an Intraparty Battle
With Private Effort on Voter Information, Ickes and Soros Challenge Dean and DNC

By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 8, 2006; Page A01


The effort by Harold Ickes, a deputy chief of staff in the Clinton White House and an adviser to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), is prompting intense behind-the-scenes debate in Democratic circles. Officials at the Democratic National Committee think that creating a modern database is their job, and they say that a competing for-profit entity could divert energy and money that should instead be invested with the national party.




Now do you want to try and state anything supported by say a 'fact'?

[evolvingsteve]

137. She doesn't want to give the republicans a heads up THERE!!!!

...YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME. If that were the case, she and her husband wouldn't be kissing McCain's ass the whole time and trumping him up so much to the point where there is not real contrast between him and her.
If she understood this, then maybe I would take your perspective and hers on Florida more serious.

[grantcart]

141. Go upthread to reply # 138 and you can find details that refute

every one of your points.

Clinton and Obama issued their pledges on the same day - it was obviously negotiated between the camps.

[Life Long Dem]

131. And all this time I thought she was an honest person.

NOT! When is she going to quit?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

134. Open Letter to Florida Dems - Stop Your Whining! You Wanted to Be Relevant!

in the spirit of Grantcart and MadFloridian:


Open Letter to Florida Democratic Leaders - Stop Your Whining! You wanted to be "relevant." Stop attacking and blaming Howard Dean for the mess you are in.

Stop pretending that Florida Democrats were helpless -we have the video and the news articles that show otherwise.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_laura_ro_080327_open_letter_to_flori.htm

[DrDan]

142. well - I have a feeling we from Florida will end up relevant . . .

Much to your obvious dismay.

[DrDan]

143. and an open letter to Will-Counted

I have absolutely no plans to stop whining.

I have been disenfranchised - through no fault of my own. The DNC and the state party leaders have clearly told me and the rest of the voters in Florida that we can be used as pawns.

Screw that!

I have no plans to be quiet. I am going to complain at every opportunity. I am going to express my displeasure by withholding any further financial support. I will not vote for the DNC's nominee (no - I will not vote GOP nor will I skip voting).

I am not going to sit in the rear of the bus, nor will I bend over once again to pick up your soap.

So save your breath . . .

[grantcart]

144. I would have thought that if your anger at being disenfranchised is genuine it

would be in your interest to find out who wanted the policy, who tried to get around the policy and who now is lying about it.

The answers to that which has been carefully documented by numerous folks in the thread are


1) Hillary's camp wanted the policy - it helped them and Harold Ickes voted for it.


2) Florida dem officials tried to get around it and their lies are caught in the video added to the thread.


3) Hillary railing against it now is in fact a lie.


Those are the folks who 'disenfranchised you' and to whom you should be complaining.

[DrDan]

145. I understand the actions of the party caused this problem

so punish them. Withhold funding. Keep them from serving at a nat'l party level. But - DO NOT DISENFRANCHISE VOTERS.

That goes against the very foundation of the party - read the party charter.

And no - I am not a Hillary supporter. Only a supporter of the party and the basic foundation under which it has come to be. A thought that ALL should be treated equally.

[grantcart]

146. To now allow Florida to vote would be to give it an enormous power

in the process and their votes would have a great deal more impact than the votes of the 23 states that joined together and voted on super duper Tuesday Feb 5th.

Your desire to have your vote count evenly with all of the other primary and caucus voters is not possible. It is only possible to inforce the rule that the state leaders openly flaunted knowing the consequences or to rewrite the rules and let Floridians have a vote that will have a much greater impact than the states of Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, etc.

But beyond that there are overwhelming legal, operational and financial problems that would need to be addressed.


Exactly which proposal are you suggesting should be implemented, how are you going to exclude those who voted republican in the primary from double voting and who do you think should pay for it?

[DrDan]

147. to ignore the problem is going to bring further problems at the GE

I am not sure if you are from Florida or Michigan - but I am. And I am hearing many many D-voters upset at being disenfranchised - to the point of being prepared to vote for mccain or not voting. I could never vote for a repub, but can understand their feeling. To be cast out of the selection process should never have happened in the first place. It goes against the very foundation of the party - equality in voting.

I don't know how to resolve it. But a beginning would be to get Obama and Clinton talking about a solution. Also - a true leader of the party - like Gore or Kennedy should be brought in to broker a solution. Based on delegates to-date - I am not sure anything would change anyway - so why not try to unify the party.

[grantcart]

148. After the nominee has been decided then a compromise will be implemented

In the GE Florida will almost certainly go McCain and Michigan will almost certainly go Democrat.


But the one thing that is not going to happen is that Florida and Michigan are going to be allowed to come back in such a way to change the what the 48 states have decided by the rules. Not going to happen period. Obama has already indicated that they are willing to negotiate now for that or he can do it after he is the nominee.

I don't think where I am from is the least bit relevant to the issues addressed.

If you want to hear all of this in excruciating detail with every element documented then you should spend a week reading Madfloridian's Journal http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian she has written atleast 50 well documented articles on the subject.

If you haven't seen this video then you need to see it first and that will inform you why the people outside of Florida are not particularly interested in bending over backwards for Florida Democrats http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpHuQi17EaE

[DrDan]

151. I have read MadFloridian's journal and posts

I have also seen the video

[DrDan]

152. the only point I was trying to make is that if you live in Mich or Fl

then you might be a bit more in touch with how the other voters from the state are feeling. I couldn't really care less where you are from.

And I am not as confident as you as to when a compromise might happen - you obviously have inside knowledge - as certain as you appear.

Whether or not Fl or Mich change anything makes no difference to me - I just want my vote counted.

In reading MadFl journal and posts, I think she has a bit of an agenda - very biased. Her articles are impressive, however, she is no interested in any other points of view. You would think a genuinely objective bystander would be interested in the points of view of others. That is not the case with MadFl.

Fl to McCain and Mich to the Democratic nominee - wow - why even go to the trouble of voting if all is decided already.

[grantcart]

153. many many observers are talking about getting FL/MI in before the convention

here is Kerry talking about it today.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4552433



I, like Dean and Obama, want a 50 state strategy. The point of mentionnig Florida a likely state for McCain is simply to state that there are many scenarios showing an electoral victory for the democrats with other states that are more likely for the democrats to carry, in disagreement with those that are saying that we must have Florida in order to win the White House.


I am not any kind of an insider. The only reason I suggested that you read Madfl is you did not seem to be aware of the video which for non Floridians has had a rather significant impact.

[grantcart]

154. just out of curiousity what are Florida democrats doing to

hold those in the video that are making a laughingstock of the voting procedures, our party's discipline, responsible and remove them from leadership positions.

Without their brazen flouting of the rules the rest of the country would not have to find a way to fix Florida's voting problem.

[ecdab]

149. Let me float a possible solution out there

In Florida the vote was -

Hillary Clinton 857,208 50%
Barack Obama 569,041 33%
John Edwards 248,604 14%
Joe Biden 15,429 1%
Bill Richardson 14,782 1%
Dennis Kucinich 9,537 1%
Chris Dodd 5,402 0%
Mike Gravel 5,261 0%

In Michigan the vote was -

Hillary Clinton 328,151 55%
Uncommitted 237,762 40%
Dennis Kucinich 21,708 4%
Chris Dodd 3,853 1%
Mike Gravel 2,363 0%

If Hillary was given her 50% in Florida and 55% in Michigan and Obama was given the balance (with the consent of the other candidates, assuming they would give it) - Michigan and Florida had their delegates counted as half delegates, so that some consequence was still given out to discourage states from violating party rules in the future, and the Michigan and Florida super delegates were not counted at all - since they were largely to blame for this entire mess - would that satisfy the voters in Michigan and Florida?

My gut tells me that is the likely outcome of this, though I doubt it is reached until after the primary season has ended (not that my gut has always been right or anything).

[grantcart]

150. Something along these lines will be worked out after the primaries

are finished but not at this time so that she can add the popular vote numbers in and try and claim a victory by popular vote.

[grantcart]

155. resuscitated as the same old lies are being spread in new threads