<p>“The DNC absolutely should seat the Michigan and Florida delegates. Millions of people went out to vote in those two states and you guys are just sore losers that Hillary won both states”
What about the people who didn’t go to the polls because the vote didn’t count? What about the people who didn’t vote for Obama because he held to the agreement and removed his name from the ballot in Michigan. How does one re-enfranchise them?</p>
<p>Okay, then who are you going to give Michigan’s undecided voters to? It’s clear that some people voted FOR Clinton by punching her name, but other people were not allowed to vote for Obama or Edwards or I think at that point even for Richardson. They all had to vote undecided or just not even show up to vote at all. Obama and Edwards followed the party mandates and took their names off the ballot… Clinton said she wouldn’t claim any votes in her name but decided to leave her name on the ballot (just in case, I guess, or for PR reasons or to show how many dems voted versus republicans… any number of reasons.)</p>
<p>It’s not being a sore loser to see the difficulties in assigning pledged delegates for “undecided” voters.</p>
<p>I find it interesting the way some Obama supporters are crying foul here. If it’s about the superdelegates, Hillary is “going against the will of the voters”, yet it would be anathema to seat MI and FL delegates, because that would be unfair. Though not seating them is even more disenfranchising than using superdelegates…</p>
<p>As I said in an earlier thread, everyone here seems to forget that the voters in MI and FL never decided to move their primary up. That they have no voice is the result of their party officials. There will be difficulties, no doubt, in figuring out how to make their votes count fairly, but to not have them count at all is unacceptable.</p>
<p>When FL and MI made a deal with the DNC to move up the primaries even though they knew it wouldn’t count for seated delegates, the blame goes to the FL and MI Democratic Committees if the voters are unhappy. The voters elected those people who made the rules. </p>
<p>I do feel sorry for FL, though. They just can’t figure out how to vote and get it to count.</p>
<p>Mistake on my part. Actually, there were more Republican votes in Florida: 1,948,479. However, Hillary got 865,099 votes and McCain got 701,352 votes.</p>
<p>So Hillary got 163,747 votes more than McCain did in a primary that wasn’t supposed to count.</p>
<p>Same in Washington–the Dem vote today will not count for delegates. They were chosen by a few people in the caucases.</p>
<p>In WA about 1% of the eligible voters chose the winner.</p>
<p>Here’s one way to settle the Florida question.</p>
<p>[Bradenton.com</a> | 02/19/2008 | Pooch primary set for Saturday](<a href=“http://www.bradenton.com/local/story/408734.html]Bradenton.com”>http://www.bradenton.com/local/story/408734.html)</p>
<p>I’m a Michigan voter who absolutely does not want the results to stand as they are. The only name on the ballot was Clinton. How is that a fair election? Most people I know either didn’t go at all because it wasn’t going to count, or didn’t go because their candidate’s name wasn’t on the ballot. To go to vote just to vote against someone when the vote wasn’t going to count just sounds dumb.</p>
<p>They can either not count, or they can have another vote. But to give Clinton all the delegates after that farce of a primary makes no sense at all.</p>
<p>“Though not seating them is even more disenfranchising than using superdelegates…”</p>
<p>How so? If the Democratic leadership in Michigan and Florida wants to have a real primary or a real caucus, they still have plenty of time before the convention to do so.</p>
<p>^^As far as seating the delegates from January, it’s a bit like a professor telling students they can do the optional reading but that the material won’t be on the test, and then including the material on the test. Unfortunately due to Michigan and Florida going against the DNC, their primaries became optional. I’m all for seating delegates from those two states but only if they do an official Redo.</p>
<p>Now I wish I were an Obama delegate - I could be Ambassador to Liechtenstein! ;)</p>
<p>I have my eye on Monte Carlo, mini. Better residence and better climate, I think.</p>
<p>Of course, I am a pretty good baker, so maybe I could be pastry chef for the Clinton White House (8 years, same as HRC) and then, in addition to my work experience (10) and years of public service as a volunteer (20), I could run for President. I’d have 38 years experience.</p>
<p>Words? “It’s not personal. It’s business.” Words? “We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!”</p>
<p>
Not exactly.</p>
<p>The Florida Democratic party didn’t want to move up the primary date. In fact, they fought it hard. They were outmaneuvered by the Republican-controlled state legislature which introduced CS/HB 537 (to change the primary date). The bill was amended to include a provision requiring a paper trail for Florida elections; that’s why it passed overwhelmingly, and with Democratic support. Democratic legislators were caught east of the rock and west of the hard place. Democratic leaders even tried to amend the bill to change the primary date to the first Tuesday in Feb. It was defeated.</p>
<p>The RNC penalized Fla. by halving their “official” recognized delegate count. The DNC issued a 100% reduction of Fla. delegates.</p>
<p>The large voter turnout was due to an important constitutional amendment concerning property taxes.</p>
<p>Fla. voters of both parties long knew the rules. Dems knew no delegates were at stake. There was no primary fever here among Dems. Fla. is a closed primary state; to vote in a primary, the voter must be registered in that party, and there’s a deadline for registration in advance of the election.</p>
<p>Further, Fla. has a large percentage of absentee voters due to military and elderly populations.</p>
<p>Clinton sensed an opening and exploited it. After she saw the handwriting on the wall in the So. Carolina primary (on Jan. 26), she decided Fla. voters should be counted after all. Here’s an article from the St. Pete Times dated Jan. 26:
[State:</a> Clinton alone in push for Florida delegates](<a href=“http://www.sptimes.com/2008/01/26/State/Clinton_alone_in_push.shtml]State:”>http://www.sptimes.com/2008/01/26/State/Clinton_alone_in_push.shtml)
“Trying to ramp up the importance of Florida’s Democratic presidential primary, Hillary Clinton on Friday [Jan. 25] called for her Democratic rivals to join her in helping get Florida delegates seated for the national convention.” </p>
<p>The Fla. primary was on Jan. 29. IOW, four days before the vote, Clinton decided the vote should count after all. Did that mobilize her troops already on the ground to get out the vote? Yes. (And they most assuredly did, especially as she also announced she would fly to Fla. the night of the primary, which she did). Was it too late to register in a party or change party affiliation on the off-chance that the Democratic primary vote might count after all? Yes.</p>
<p>There will be no second-chance primary here in Fla.; the state won’t pay for it. There will be no mail-in primary because the party doesn’t have the money for it. The DNC has proposed a caucus plan for 150 polling places. The Jan. 29 primary had 6,600 polling places. (For a comparison, the Iowa caucuses used 1,700 polling places.) Caucuses would disenfranchise many of the military and elderly.</p>
<p>As a Fla. voter (who is not registered in a party), I feel strongly that no Fla. Democratic delegate votes should count.</p>
<p>“I never saw that anyone in Obama’s campaign said they would pursue the pledged delegates so why so they owe anyone anything? Think this is another Clinton parsing? By getting him to say he won’t go after pledged delegates,”</p>
<p>St. Obama is already poaching them in disguise. </p>
<p>They just call it,“Superdelegates should vote based on the will of the people” or by buying them.</p>
<p>Time for another cool-aid.</p>
<p>ooh, disguises now… where? I wanna see them!</p>
<p>Simba has a very valid point.</p>
<p>Clinton’s new campaign manager has done a great job of activating a major smear campaign. It may backfire. She has made no claims of any substance whatsoever. With all the skeletons in her closet? How ironic! :eek:</p>
<p>If Obama stays on the high road he will win. Saint or no Saint. She will hang herself.</p>
<p>Well at least the new manager is DOING something…</p>
<p>^
After the blowout for Obama in Wisconsin, probably crying! Or possibly moving on to other opportunities? Could be another shake-up in the Clinton Campaign. Stay tuned…The attack ads back-fired. Now what??</p>