I'm an Obama supporter, and I think we should just seat the MI and FL delegations.

[GOPBasher]

Why not seat them? It won't make a difference. Obama's lead in pledged delegates will remain. They will temporarily be tied in the popular vote, but not even that will last long after North Carolina. So, we don't lose anything by seating them, and it leaves Hillary with no excuses for the superdelegates. Plus, it'll help us gain favor in the general election in these two vitally important states.

[Poll_Blind]

1. No thanks. n/t

PB

[anonymous171]

2. Seating the MI delegates would be totally ridiculous.

[MichiganVote]

3. Help you gain favor? First the voters are rotten hamburger and now you want a meal?

[GOPBasher]

9. I don't get your analogy.

Maybe I'm not smart enough. I'm just saying that it'll make no difference in the end result. And we can't go into the general election with voters in MI and FL pissed off at us. (I live in MI too, btw.)

[MichiganVote]

20. I think the voters in Mi. are already disaffiliated from this election

[roseBudd]

4. Because only one name on the ballot is like North Korea?

[GOPBasher]

15. But what difference would it make?

It wouldn't make a difference in the election. It would make a difference in the voters attitudes toward the Democratic party, and do you want to give me electoral math where we can win in November without either FL or MI?

[Buzz Clik]

5. Seat them. Okay. But not with the "votes" in their unsanctioned primaries.

Split down the middle. If they want to be seatedly badly enough, they'll take it.

[SunsetDreams]

6. exactly, they get no rewards for breaking the rules

[Adelante]

14. Exactly right nt

[Mike Nelson]

7. I wouldn't include MI... but...

counting FL might help him in the general; if not, it looks like McCain wins big.

[GOPBasher]

11. Perhaps that could be a good compromise. n/t

[Adelante]

18. FL can't be seated if MI is not

They were two unsanctioned primaries. It would be grossly unfair to MI if FL were excused.

[bluestateguy]

8. I'm for seating them too, but as entirely uncommitted delegations

This way they are represented, and both candidates can make their case for the delegates' support on equal terms.

I often wonder here if Hillary really cares about FL and MI being represented, or if it's just the delegates that she wants.

[Stop Cornyn]

10. Agreed

[GOPBasher]

13. It's just the delagates she wants, of course.

If it were the other way around, she'd be arguing against seating them.

[CakeGrrl]

12. Seat them, but not "as-is".

Clinton doesn't deserve 55(?) free MI delegates for cheating.

[IndependentDem]

16. i agree with the delegates but not the popular vote. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

17. I believe in following the rules. Clinton and Obama signed off on it. There's no problem.

[guyanakoolaid]

19. Bah... rules are so "last year"

Don't tell me you still believe in "math", too

:sarcasm:

[IndependentDem]

22. thats crazy talk! n/t

[Asgaya Dihi]

21. Not a chance

If they end up being seated in any respect it should at best be with the minimum 50% cut in delegates that the rules they violated demanded as a minimum. If we just ignore that then there's no reason for anyone else to ever listen to the rules again either, just raise enough hell and they'll let you get away with it.

Personally I think the way they did that was too harsh and an awful lot of the blame for the way things did work out goes directly to Terry McAuliffe and others who dealt with the States, imposed the penalty, then went to work for the Clinton campaign and in some twisted way started blaming Obama for it. The States should have been hit for what they did but there should have been some way to hit the politicians harder and the people less if we had to go over the 50% minimum for the way the politicians went about it.

Blaming him for not accepting deals which would have been unfair as hell to him and punished him for something he didn't do was pretty low too and I don't want to see the Clinton camp rewarded for that either. At this point it might be better to stick to the agreement both signed and leave it at that.