The last, best option for Florida and MIchigan. Strip the Syperdelegate empower the voters,

[Perky]

The party rules are the party rules. It is not the DNCs fault, it it not Obama's fault. It is not Clinton's fault. It is the state party's fault. and to a lesser extent it it the state Republicans.

48 states followed the rules that the Florida and MI DNC members voted for. They knew they were running an unsanctioned election and that it would not count.


The only resolution that is palatable to the party and fair to the candidates is to strip the FL/MI Super delegates of their ability to vote on the Nomination. Only the Pledged delegates should vote.

This leaves the voters whole and enfranchised. Does not penalize the candidates and punishes the party apparatchniks.

It leaves only one thing open for discussion and that is the allocation of the pledged delegates. It is not a matter of whether the candidates campaigned in the states or not....Or whether they advertised or not.... It's that they did not get to exercise the GOTV engines.
There ought to be a recognition that lots of people chose not to vote, even though there was record turnout

In the case of Michigan I think it should be split 50/50 or it should be a number of uncommitted delegates equal to the apparent winner.

In the case of Florida,the actual results probably skewed a little toward Hillary because of the Florida Seniors and that African American and working class whites in the northern third of the state probably were not as likely to vote. It might only be a point or two.. but it could factor in the delegate split in some districts. I don't know how you mitigate that. It might be impossible. But it should be recognized

The idea of taking away half their delegates, ultimately is more disenfranchising to the voters in the greater scheme of things and does not penalizes the real culprits here. The opinion of voters do matter and they should not be penalized for the machinations of party hacks.


Oh one least thing. Get off Howard Dean's back. He did not set the rules or the calendar. It was done by the DNC Members including those from Florida and Michigan. His primary role is defend the rules and protect against anarchy.

[SoFlaJet]

1. the DLC has hated Dean since he "ONLY"

won us the house and senate in '06...remember Carville could have done a better job...so HE said...fuck them all-we need to take back this party and this is the election we do it. Let them all start their own party with Joe Lieberman since they're all acting like republicans anyway

[MichiganVote]

2. Let's just blow up both frickin' states. Who needs them anyway?

[HockeyMom]

4. Don't know about Michigan

but you can blow up Florida. Just give a little advance warning.:evilgrin:

[fadedrose]

13. Michigan is already blown up; economy beat you to it.....nt

[MichiganVote]

3. Um...that was a little harsh, let's try some reality instead.

A quick review of why Michigan moved up its primary date:

In 2000, Representative Dingell and Senator Carl Levin went to the DNC to discuss moving up the date for the Michigan Primary. Both were promised by the DNC, the issue would be addressed. In 2003, Carl Levin threatened to move up the date of the Michigan Primary to coincide with the New Hampshire Primary. Carl was talked out of it by the Democratic National Committee and he relented. Both Dingell and Levin were promised a commission would be established to review adding states to the earlier part of the campaign. Out of the commission study and in 2007, came a Nevada Caucus and a South Carolina Primary. While not happy, Michigan agreed to keep their February 9th date as long as New Hampshire and Iowa did not move their dates up. When New Hampshire moved their primary date up, the Michigan legislature moved its date to January 15th.

As Rep. John Dingell stated:

"We tried to stay within the rules"

"We tried. But Iowa and New Hampshire have a hold on the whole thing. What you have with Florida and Michigan are two states who've said, Enough is enough!"

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/1025388.asp...

[Perky]

5. They failed to convince the DNC...Then they decided to do things their way,

Iy's like the the tigers playing a series of games against the Tokyo Giants and wanting them to count in the AL Central standings.


Ig you do no like the rules...too bad.

[MichiganVote]

6. Or the DNC failed to convince the state leaders and voters....

[Perky]

7. The full DNC voted and approved the Primary schedule

[MichiganVote]

8. Yes...and then they allowed NH and Iowa to move up w/o censure

[Perky]

9. Because othere moved up and it is state law in NH

[MichiganVote]

11. It may be state law but they moved before Mi. did and you can't quote

state law as a valid basis in one state and sanction Mi. for following their laws while quoting chapter and verse from a rule in a party.

Makes no sense.

[yewberry]

15. Regardless of state law, MI moved before NH did.

Please, look it up. NH announced their move in November, months after MI moved.

[yewberry]

10. MI moved its primary months before NH did.

NH moved its primary in mid-November 2007. The governor of MI signed the bill, when, in September?

They did not try to stay within the rules, and they're lying about NH.

[MichiganVote]

12. You didn't read it.

[yewberry]

14. The article? You're right--the link is bad.

And I did read what you quoted. It's inaccurate.

[Tatiana]

16. I think they thought they would allocate the delegates by a later caucus.

Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio all announced the move Tuesday, the deadline for filing such paperwork.

The feud between the Michigan Democratic Party and the DNC comes as the Republicans face off in a presidential debate in Dearborn, Michigan.

Under Democratic National Committee rules, only Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina are allowed to hold primaries before February 5.

But Michigan Democrats moved their state's primary date to January in an effort to increase the state's influence in the nominee selection process, arguing Iowa and New Hampshire unfairly dominate the process.

<snip>

"Today's decision reaffirms our pledge to respect the primary calendar as established by the DNC and makes it clear that we will not play into the politics of money and Republican machinations that only serve to interfere with the primary calendar," said Biden campaign manager Luis Navarro.

<snip>

The Biden campaign criticized Clinton and Dodd for not taking their names off the ballot.

"The Dodd and Clinton campaigns have chosen to hedge their bets, thereby throwing this process into further disarray," Biden campaign manager Navarro said. "In doing so, they have abandoned Democrats in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina."

<snip>

But Clinton may also benefit from staying and winning even a non-competitive primary, Schneider said.

"It will earn her a lot of good will in Michigan if the state schedules a later caucus to pick its delegates," he said.

The DNC voted to punish both Michigan and Florida by refusing to seat their delegates at next summer's Democratic National Convention.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/09/michigan.primary/index.html