Schmoomcgoo

Can anybody restate this, please? I think there's some information in the following quote and the quote imbedded in it, but I'm missing it.

interesteddad

I'll try again.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) rules called for any state that moved its primary ahead of the agreed upon dates could be penalized by losing up to 50% of their delegates. This is the same rule the Republicans had. The Florida and Michigan primaries would have gone on as scheduled, candidates would have campaigned, and 50% delegates would have been seated.

When the Florida and Michigan legislatures moved the dates up, the Republican party imposed the 50% penalty. The DNC rules committee met in late August with the widespread expectation being they would do the same, since that's what their rulebook called for.

However, by that point, the polling data was clear that Clinton would win both states in a landslide. The Obama delegates to the DNC rules committee surprised everyone and ramrodded thru a 100% disenfranchisement of both Florida and Michigan. Keep in mind, the DNC represents the left-wing of the Democratic party, the die-hard Democrats from states like Alabama and Wyoming where their are three Democrats in entire state and they are still burning their draft cards and cheering Jane Fonda to visit Hanoi. The DNC despises the Clintons and any Democrat centrist enough to win elections.

At the time, Howard Dean said, "Don't worry." This is just a warning to prevent any other states from moving up. We'll fix it before the actual primaries. Of course, we aren't going to disenfranchise two key states. That would be suicide.

But, then the DNC (and the media) realized that the nomination was over if:

Obama wins: Iowa, SC.
Clinton wins: NH, Nevada (Latino), Michigan (landslide), Florida (landslide).

So, there was a concerted effort to pretend that millions of voters didn't go to the polls in Mich and Fla and give landslide victories to Clinton.

Now, Howard Dean has let it drag on so long it's a complete disaster. The Dems have to seat Fla. and Mich. or they have no prayer in November, disenfranchising two of the largest electoral college states. But, Obama's supporters will be furious. Conversely, myself and approximately 30% of the Clinton supporters (according to this week's national polling) are fully prepared to vote for McCain in November if the DNC doesn's seat Fla and Mich and essentially "steals" the nomination from Clinton.

It is a total lose/lose situation and it is ALL Howard Dean's fault. This never should have happened. Of all parties, the Democratic Party should know that it has to count the votes in Florida. Duh.

mercymom

Here is the Huffington Post account of the Fla/Mich debacle. While the title appears to blame it on the Republicans, a careful reading of the article shows where the blame really lies:

Wayne Barrett: Could the Republicans Pick the Democratic Nominee? -- The Untold Story of How the GOP Rigged Florida and Michigan - Politics on The Huffington Post

stockmarket

interested dad:

is there a google link or you tube link for wha you say. I mean Dean stating that this "At the time, Howard Dean said, "Don't worry." This is just a warning to prevent any other states from moving up. We'll fix it before the actual primaries. Of course, we aren't going to disenfranchise two key states. That would be suicide." If he did made this statement then it is wrong to go back to his words.

I am not question your integrity but just there are many flames in this thraed. I just want to educate myself and want to see this on you tube or in newspaper columns such as ny times or even cnn or any news website. How do I serach it? what you claim is a chnage of the game and I wouldlike to see a concrete things in writing or on a web site.

1of42

Maybe you need your sense of perspective re-aligned, but on this forum over the past few weeks there has been a pretty consistent stream of Hillary-bashing, without a word leveled against Obama (except over the Wright matter, and then only by self-admitted Republican posters).

Taking you as an excellent example, you have consistently taken every opportunity to slander HRC (calling her a liar, saying she cares for no one but herself, and so forth - whether those things are true or not is immaterial) and defend Obama. It is incredibly ironic that you would complain about nothing being allowed to be said about Hillary when the preponderance of posts on this forum lately have been pro-Obama, and to the extent that Hillary is involved (often not at all except by your repeated and boring cries of "LIAR" and so forth), anti-Hillary.

I'm not sure whether to laugh or start banging my head against a wall. Accusations of gossip-mongering coming from you is the very definition of the pot calling the kettle black, given your consistent history of gleefully denigrating HRC at any opportunity.

You may not have a candidate, but it is immediately obvious which candidate you don't like the most. Anyone want a guess?

(By the way, if I were voting I'd only be marginally more likely to vote for Clinton than Obama, I'm just tired of your never-ending stream of vitriol towards Hillary and anyone associated with her)

Now, something I really do need to do:

Last time you said this kind of thing I was pretty stridently opposed to your viewpoint. Evidently, you were right. My apologies.

Just head a couple of threads down to whichever thread full of 1sokkermom calling Clinton a lying witch comes up first. There's lots, I'm sure you won't have much trouble.

momofnewP

Thanks Celtic I thought she went to Yale which prepares their students very well for the bar exams. I am really surprised she failed.

interesteddad

Stockmarket:

The Huffington Post article referenced above is a pretty solid account of the DNC shenanigans over the Mich/Florida disenfranchisement.

It's hard to give you more links because you really had to be following the action on the hardcore Democratic and political blogs on daily basis last August. None of this was being widely covered by the mainstream media.

I never, in my wildest dreams, thought last August that the DNC would actually disenfranchise Florida and Michigan. My assumption was that they would leave the draconian sanctions in place until the primary calendar was settled with no more jumping up in line (which it was) and then a solution would be found. Dean repeatedly said in interviews, "we'll work it out..." It was just unthinkable that the Democrats would shoot themselves in the foot.

It was only when January came along and no solution put in place that I realized Dean, Brazille, and the DNC fully intended to try to steal the nomination for Obama.

interesteddad

She passed the Arkansas bar exam, where she planned to live with Bill Clinton, at roughly the same time.

interesteddad

To understand the extent of the Florida problem for the Democrats in November, look at the Rasmussen poll earlier this month:

McCain: 53
Obama: 38

McCain: 44
Clinton: 45

Remember, 200 votes in Florida and the Supreme Court decision not to allow a recount was the difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush being President for the last eight years.

The Democrats simply cannot write off Florida and have any prayer of remaining a nationally viable party.

cangel

>>the die-hard Democrats from states like Alabama and Wyoming where their are three Democrats in entire state and they are still burning their draft cards and cheering Jane Fonda to visit Hanoi.<<

We have more than THREE Democrats, I know of at least FOUR, although they are all trial lawyers, and I have no idea what their opinion of Jane Fonda is, but they appear too old to have draft cards.

Just kidding - how ya' doing ID?? Is your offspring graduating soon?? Send me a PM.

Mr Payne

At this point McCain could steamroll Obama in all the midwest swing states, colorado, & new mexico. Florida would be the least of Obama's problems.

interesteddad

Ha ha. Fair enough. Four Democrats left in Alabama. Point being that the Democratic party is not exactly a powerhouse in some of these states. The odds of a Democratic Senate or Presidential win in Alabama are exactly zero. Lurleen Wallace (bless her heart) could come back from the grave and run as a Democrat and she'd lose!

The impact of Dean's so-called 50-state strategy at the DNC is to dilute the influence of states (like Florida and Michigan and New York and California and Pennsylvania) that are vitally important to the Democratic party taking a a national majority.

interesteddad

Mr. Payne:

Yep. Obama could kiss off Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Missouri, and propbably New Jersey.

I think McCain would even have a fighting chance of beating Obama in Massachusetts...or at least force him to spend money defending his turf. Rank n' file. Democrats here are mad as hell at our state Democratic party officials. The Clinton win here in the primary was an in-your-face slapdown of Kerry and Kennedy. We've already seen Obama in the form of his stablemate, Deval Patrick. Gives a purdy speech about unicorns and puppies and gathering round for a chorus of kumbaya. Waltzes into the governors office and proceeds to be incompetent due to his lack of political experience. Didn't even bother to show up to lobby the day of the big vote on his unpopular casino gambling referendum -- he was in New York pitching his book deal.

Of course, if Obama had to fight for Massachusetts, we'd be looking at a landslide of Dukakis proportions....in an election the Democrats should have had in the bag. Bush fatigue. Horrible economy. And a never ending Republican war.

1sokkermom

1of42,
I am glad to see my posts have really impacted you. I am not sure why.
Too bad you aren't voting!
I am glad to see once again that you are consistent in directing your anger toward me (for some odd reason), and ignoring the vitriol spewed toward Obama by others.

simba

"Glad to see once again you are consistent in directing your anger toward me"

he would have been gentle if you were his crazy aunt for the past 19 years of his life.