Clinton, Obama Battle Over Florida, Michigan Solution

I’m sorry they oppose a mail in ballot because it in some way might be undemocratic but want to override 2.2 million votes cast and divy up the delegates 50/50. Does anyone else find those two positions at odds?

Sounds to me like Clinton is pulling a George Bush, do things the way I say or nobody wins and it will be your fault. She won’t agree to anything less than having the bogus results counted as the final tally. I doubt seriously she would feel the same way had the two contests been different or if she were ahead by any measure in the contest. Though some voted, many more did not because they were informed that the primaries would not be counted. So there are more voters at stake than those that voted in those primaries. Clinton wants to win, and I can respect that, but she does not care how she wins and that is a serious problem for me. She knows that the campaigns will need to approve any do over and is stating very clearly right now that she will not allow that. That is a Bush 101 tactic. Give me my win or everyone loses. I will not vote in the general if she is nominated because i could not support the current CinC that advocates such a position, so I will certainly not support another one, no matter what her party.

There’s one way to ensure the vote isn’t tampered with and that’s to count the results in a democratic election where 2.2 million democrats voted, at least from Florida. Michigan may need a redo, or all the elected delegates could stand as uncommitted. What people dont understand here is that delegates were elected, hundreds of them. Those people should not be un-elected, unless the can run in anotehr election. it would be undemocratic, and disrespectful to those people who put their names forward, campaigned and are now probably raising funds to go to convention.
It’s not the Soviet Union or China, you cant just override a vote and un-elect delegates because they dont favor you.
These delegates need to be allowed to stand or run again in another election.

What about those voters that stayed at home knowing that their votes would not count? The rules are the rules.

I agree with Ferraro, Barack wouldn’t be in this position if he was a white man.
Any candidate who has energized the American people, called for Change in Washington politics, run a consistent positive campaign and have a Clear Vision for the future of America would be the NOMINEE by now.
No talk about a revote, super delegates, vice-presidency or other strategies to steal the election would even be considered or mentioned.
Just the thought that this election could come down to Florida again makes me sick to my stomach! How quick we forget!

lol again, this election campaign has crossed the line of stupid and ridiculous!
I know I probably shouldn’t ask this question, but why is it that every time an issue comes up such as this (the same happened with NAFTA), the finger gets pointed at Obama?
Now Obama wants to hide the votes? How stupid is that statement?? You hillary sheeple need to go take your meds and calm down. We understand that she is behind and in danger of not winning the nomination, but everything that goes on, that doesn’t go her way, is not Obama’s fault.
Obama didn’t make the rules, neither did hillary. So she should stop trying to make this look like another Obama gaffe.

The rules are rules, Fl anf MI can’t be seated comments, are some of the most juvenile opinions I have ever heard.
MI and FL will be seated at convention and always were going to be. Everyone knows that.
They were always going to be seated by the winner at convention, as their republican counterparts will be. The only issue now is that there wont be a clear winner at convention.
If it isnt resolved before then Obama and Clinton will have to get up at convention and say why they do or do not want them seated as is.
There is no better way to guarentee that obama will lose the white house than if he argues against seating MI and FL or argues to override an election where 2.2 million Americans voted and divy them up like a kindergarden snack 50/50, and prevails. It’s over then.
I do not believe he will do that as its political suicide. So what’s he doing?? Stalling, so it doesnt look like Clinton is winning. That’s all.
The DNC needs to seat these delegates SOON or agree to a revote SOON, because we all know they will be seated at convention. Regardless of the juvenile aguements against seating them that completely ignore the political process.
Howard Dean, by the way, should have his but kicked out of the convention and the DNC forever for this fiasco. 100% his fault and he is refusing to show leadership to solve it in a timely manner,as it should have been resolved already. He is a disaster for the democratic party.

If the Clinton people are really concerned with the rights of the voters to have theri delegates seated despite their purposeful breach of the rules laid down by the DNC, then a 50/50 split is the obvious and easy solution. To insist that the results of those illegal primaries be made legitimate is beyond ridiculous. Obama was not even on the ballot in Michigan and in Flordia, how much of that win was based on simple name recognition? Obama, following the DNC rules, did not campaign and, therefore, had no opportunity to introduce himself to the voters of Florida. Also, how many voters stayed home because the results would not count? You cannot call either Michigan or Florida a legitimate ‘win’ for Clinton. Just to be clear, going in to primary season, I was a Clinton supporter but because of things that have happened in the course of the primary (like this situation), I have moved my support to Obama and I represent one of Clinton’s ‘core’ supporters age wise, race wise, etc.
If the DNC backs down from their previous position, there will be chaos in the next election as states jockey for position and jump ahead of one another. It is will also prove that Will Rogers was right when he said, “I do not belong to any organized poltiical party; I’m a Democrat.”

I agree with Ferraro, Barack wouldn’t be in this position if he was a white man.
This racial comment is a shame. Look at the history of this country. To suggest that Barak is successful is because of his skin color is very low coming from People who have ruled this country since the beginning. I am a white male and very disgusted about those racial comments. Obama is the only candidate who can reach out both side blacks and whites. When Hillary won OH and other states that hold a majority of whites who voted for her, nobody said that she won because she is white. Please enough of these negative comments that are very devicive and Hillary is 100% behind it. this a strategy to win PA. shame on you Hillary.

About three years ago a well known televangelist, Perry Stone, told his congregation that God spoke to him and said Sen. Clinton will be the next President. There is nothing ABC News or the other networks can do to stop Sen. Clinton from becoming President.

I think that the delegates should be seated not in the interest of a specific candidate, but in the interest of the Democratic party. We will need these states come GE and if either candidate comes off as seemingly willing to disenfranchise their votes, it could potentially (negatively) impact the GE outcome.
I think a 51/49 split would be a good compromise. It doesn’t really give the Clinton camp any huge advantage in pledged delegate count and it also let’s the Obama camp look like they are taking the high road by acknowledging that Clinton did perform better in Florida and arguably Michigan. Since that will never happen though…
I think a 50/50 seating is the way to go on this where the pledged delegates are divided equally amongst the candidates and the superdelegates move forward with their traditional role and casting their vote as they wish.

All these, Hillary is trying to find the loophole. She expected to be the nominee immediately after Super Tuesday. Nothing worked on her side. Florida and Michigan voted before Super Tuesday. She did not raise any issue about it.
What was the reason for her to fly to Florida? Just only to thank people who voted for her while knowing the votes do not count!
Am pretty sure if she could had been nominated after Super Tuesday, she could had kept quiet and forget those 2million she is claiming are important now.

I find it amazing that the obama camp can call counting votes, “stealing an election” but want to override an election where 2.2 million democrats cast ballots and just divy up the delegates 50/50.
That’s not stealing an election???
Wow you can cut that irony with a knife. Um overriding a democratic election in favour of one candidate is well “stealing an election”, and there’s no way the American people will se it any other way.
But its Clinton who wants to “win at all costs” and is “dividing the party” right?????
Funny, I dont see it that way.

By the way, the request to divide the delegates 50/50 at the credentialing committee would have to come from these states themselves, and there isn’t a smowball’s chance of that happening.
Count the votes or re-vote are the only two options.

Wake up people. how can you consider the election in FL and MI when Hillary’s name was the only one in the ballot? Who was she compete against? come on. How about the people who did not vote because they were told that their voices will not be counted? If Hillary did abide n=by the rules, we would not have to be where we are now. she created a mess. she is not trustworthy. nominate her and she will deceive you more. and put the country in more danger.

Sure Hillary and McCain should run together with Hillary as VP to McCain. They are two sore losers of the same old.

Neither campaign is going to come to a consensus on how to resolve this issue. Obama is pushing for a caucus and Clinton is pushing for a primary, both for obvious reasons.
Regardless of the solution, these states’ participation in the convention will be vital to the democratic strategy to win the back White House.
Where as I would love to see them seated proportionally to vote count, the rules *were* outlined at the onset of this race and a 50/50 split is the least expensive and arguably fair way to ensure that these states are seated.
I think Clinton should aggressively argue her case to the superdelegates of those states and that is where she has the possibility to widen the delegate count in those states (if my understanding that the superdelegates from those states are not currently seated is correct).

Let them eat cake!

Yes Hillary is so kind, so willing to ensure that Michigan and Florida’s voters are counting, is she going to cry again? The reality is simply -her way or the high way. Voters have put her second and she wants to put herself first. Please stop trying to take the lead when you have to be led. The division between big states and small states, blue states and red states is simply discriminatory. People somehow think that winning big states is a way of winning presidency, the problem is simply that Clinton has not won some of these states again McCain, but against Obama, same paryy candidates. Wo ever the nominee will be New York will remain in democrats’ hand. The message is simple: are you better off now? if not do not vote McCain who will be en extension of failed Bush policies.

The reality is, if you include Florida, it doesn’t change Hillary’s position much. In Michigan, only Clinton and Kucinch were on the ballot, so it certainly would NOT be fair to include without a re-vote.

A national ad that he knew would run in FL. Please, there is no way you can make this seem like an “innocent” mistake.

2009, I haven’t heard Obama “call for a caucus.” In fact, he’s said in interviews over the last couple of days that he’ll accept whatever the party decides to do, as long as it’s fair to both candidates. No where have I seen Obama “call for a caucus.”

Too many posts, not enough research. “Truth”, did you look up the fact that, as you say, Clinton broke the rules in Florida.” Obama was the only one running ads in Fla. Clinton won, but did not go to the state until after the vote. Facts are truth. And to the poster that said Clinton was the only one on the ballot in Fl. FACTS, get them straight.

James, you left out Massachusetts, maybe on purpose?
Georgia is a BIG state?
And Florida is not – I know, it doesn’t count. Just the fact that Obama ran ads night and day, despite other candidates pulling their national ads – and he stick got his butt kicked by 300,000.

“SB”,
I’m with you. The Democratic Party is the party of inclusion. The right wing posers, posing as members of Obama’s campaign, seem to be doing their best to disrupt this nominating process. A re-vote by mail is the only sane way to go. (Senator Levin of Michigan actually referred to it as a caucus by mail — don’t caucuses favor Obama?). The re-vote is going to happen. Dean cannot torpedo this one.

Obama has said and Axelrod has said that Obama wants caucuses.
He loves them. They give you the fewest votes to represent the most people, in the shortest amount of time, in the most confusing manner possible.
He is not what he says he is – and your defenses of his behavior is always something from Clinton’s past.
That is like you getting pulled over by the highway patrol for someone elses speeding.
You are trying to distract with the past (that Barack hates so much) and not answer the point. We know Clinton is a mess. But that is not the topic. The topic is Is Obama What He Says He Is, or Only What He THINKS He Is?
He never answers with a direct yes or no. He says “Well Clinton did this in 1992, and Clinton never did that in 1996 and . . .”
That is not a defense for what YOU OBAMA are doing NOW.
THEIR PAST DOES NOT NEGATE YOUR PRESENT.

LA in Indiana : Lies? Did Obama run national TV ads before Florida primary? Could the ads being viewed by Florida voters? Did any other candidates run any ads (locally or nationally) there? Why would you keep lying while trying to label others with the true story as liars? Where are the well educated Obama supporters? Hmm, I forgot most of them are simply one-day-democrat-but-forever-republican, and had already returned to Rep. base after casting votes for Obama to knock Clinton out.

BOth states have flately rejected a caucus. Not going to happen. They haven’t even commented on divying up the delegates arbitrarily by a central committee, as it’s absurd, soviet and childish.
There are only two options. Count the votes, or have a re-vote by mail.
One or the other. Not seating these states is not an option.

SB guess you are one that the rules and regs apply to everyone but you>>>>You see the rules were in place way before this vote took place ,the person voting had nothing to do with this it is the big wigs so yes,I feel sorry for their votes not counting buttttttttttttttt.Damn if there are two sets of rules for everything guess we can consider ourselves no better then some other countries that do as they damn well please…….Change the rules to apply to what you want, when I went to college it didn’t work that way/ if they come up with the monies to re do the election good ,then they can count.

The reason why its called “caucus by mail” is because the PArty pays not the state. They are mail in votes, possibly with one polling station per county or town, which would be called a fire hall caucus with a mail in ballot, again because the PArty pays. It would not however be a meeting with set time and place and waiting to be counted in public.
It would for all intents and purposes be a mail in primary the PArty pays for and it is the only siolution other than seating the delegates already selected.
The other option would be to count Fl and then have a full primary in MI with money raised instead of paying for both.

Oops, that should be NOT denigrate one another.

h
The rules are the rules arguement is for kindergarden children, not the Democratic Party or any sofisticated political process to nominate a candidate that is meant to WIN an election.
The point is to WIN the whitehouse. Fl and MI were ALWAYS going to be seated. They were NEVER not going to be seated!
It was just assumed the winner would be clear and then ask for them to be seated at convention.
The process exists WITHIN THE RULES to either accept the vote as is, revote, or ask for them to be seated at convention. One of these has to happen, anyone with any knowledge of this process or any level of political sophistication knows this. The Obama campaign is just stalling.
The “rules are the rules” arguement shows a laughable ignorance of the rules and proceedures, not to mention the intention of the punishment, (that these states not get attention and money for their primaries). The intention was NEVER to ban them from convention. NEVER. It’s not possible.
The DNC is in the business of winning elections not conceding them before they have begun.

LA in Indiana : Just another typical arrogant Obama supporter. Too bad and I have to keep wondering where are those well-educated Obama supporters.

LA in Indiana, I didn’t say that. I just think posting a blog by an Obama supporter as a source for “research” is not going to sway my vote. I am open to a debate on the ISSUES, so please engage in one rather than flinging ### on people and calling everyone names if they don’t agree with you.

That is a fact on all the blogs the Obama supporters were telling MI voter to vote undecided, they wanted to show that Hillary was not popular, there were even robo calls being made in MI to vote undecided because Obama’s name was not on the ballot.
Fl voters also had another ballot with a tax issue to vote on, so am sure voters paid attention to that election.
When Sharpton makes the claim that people in FL did not come out to vote so what did they do with the ballot on the tax issue, did they ignore that one also?

@Don | Mar 12, 2008 12:57:34 PM:
What kind of logic is that? His name was on the FL ballot whereas it wasn’t on the MI ballot. Giving him the whole undecided bloc of votes is generous and favors him in MI. Giving him everything that wasn’t “Clinton” in FL is fuzzy logic.
I’m not advocating here what should be done with the MI and FL vote. I would just like to understand your reasoning and logic on that.

SJ,
No matter how you try to spin it, the fact remains that there were voters who didn’t show up because they knew their votes wouldn’t count.

Its not spin but if you have a valid tax issue and you refuse to vote on it what kind of voter are you?
So some are only interested in voting when it’s Obama in the race all other voting issues don’t matter?

Is there anyone who will flatly deny that voters stayed home because they knew their vote for a candidate wouldn’t count?

To those who want the votes in MI and FL to stand as is without a re-vote: Why are you afraid of a re-vote? The people who voted for Clinton are free to do so again. In FL, those who voted for Edwards and “other” can now vote for someone in the running, including Clinton. She may do even better than before. There should either be a re-vote, or stand by the original DNC rules.

Of all this hyped rhetoric, I would just like to once again ask, WHERE WERE THESE SPINELESS MINDLESS POLITICAL CHRONIES in this whole year since the DNC penalty ruling? Where have these fervant WE THE PEOPLE advocates been for an entire year, who now are so concerned about the equality of democratic voting & their rights to vote? One with any intelligence would QUESTION SERIOUSLY their sincere representation of the FL & MI constituents!

Was there a rule to say take your name off the ballot?
There was a rule that no ad were to be shown in FL, but someone had ads running did they not, but then again it was a national ad and it was out of Obama’s control and the Obama camp did not know this when they were paying for all these ads….yeah right.

SJ – Obama’s ads were within the rules. He knows, because he verified that before they ran. As opposed to Clinton, who thinks she can dictate changes to rules after the fact.

cba:: I agree this has to be the dumbest thing I have ever seen in my life, they want to win the WH, they know they will have to hold FL, but yet they are angering the FL voters.
It sure beats me what is the logic in that, maybe the really want to lose this race sure looks like it because they are cutting down their chances daily.

The DNC needs to think about the consequences if it doesn’t stick with its initial decision to not allow delegates from these states.
If Florida and Michigan effectively break scheduling rules and then get a do-over at no cost to them, then in 2012 every state will have an incentive to schedule primaries well in advance of allowed dates.
What would be left to threaten them with? “We’ll punish you with a new vote, and you you won’t even have to pay for it.”
Somehow, I doubt that threat will carry much weight. Therefore, if Florida and Michigan are allowed to pull this scam, I’ll be starting a petition to have my state, Virginia, hold its 2012 presidential primaries in November of 2011.

clinton is only concerned about those states because she is very far behind in the delegate state and popular vote count…when she was winning earlier where was the talks about fl and mi..rules are rules they voters knew going to the polls that it didnt count but still voted anyway…if anything it should be a 50/50 split which would still put obama on top
congratulation to obama on the ms

Very interesting!!!
Why is the Obama campaign making a political argument that doesn’t match Sen. Obama’s legislative record?
In June, Sen. Obama co-sponsored a bill that would establish a vote by mail grant program.
The text of the legislation Sen. Obama endorsed explains the benefits of a vote by mail system over other forms of voting:
(12) Vote by Mail allows voters to educate themselves because they receive ballots well before election day, which provides them with ample time to research issues, study ballots, and deliberate in a way that is not possible at a polling place.
(13) Vote by Mail is accurate–at least 2 studies comparing voting technologies show that absentee voting methods, including Vote by Mail systems, result in a more accurate vote count.
(14) Vote by Mail results in more up-to-date voter rolls, since election officials use forwarding information from the post office to update voter registration.
(15) Vote by Mail allows voters to visually verify that their votes were cast correctly and produces a paper trail for recounts.
Just further evidence that you can’t trust anything he says. Spin Spin Spin. He is just a politician and nothing more.

But to finish my thought, SJ, basically I’m saying this. Our constitutional republic can survive any individual’s election to any office. It can’t survive a complete disregard for rules.

Paul – Very well said.
RL – Maybe I didn’t read the article on the Obama camps concerns with the mail-in re-vote so I will paste it in for the purpose of clarity.
“It seems to become more of a Clinton production — those suggesting they could pay for it are Clinton supporters, those people designing the likely mail in plans here are Clinton supporters. I think everyone has to be cautious about that … it is primarily Clinton supporters pushing for the mail in.”
I fail to see anywhere in the released statement that Senator Obama is against mail-in voting. He is against supporters of his opponent running the show. Wouldn’t you be? I would also like to say that when Senator Clinton started this whole process with a 250 super delegate lead she was not fighting for FL & MI voters. That is until she won both contests.

Paul -
I’m very glad you brought up the rule of law. Very good point.

Paul -
Agreed. But the general laws are undermined when institutions — especially political parties, which are an unofficial, but nevertheless critical, part of our governmental system — disregard (or tolerate disregard of) their own rules.

Michael,
Actually, Obama ended up with more delegates than Clinton in Texas, because THOSE ARE THE RULES — or does she want to change those inconvenient rules, too?
Where was HRC’s bleeding heart for the disenfranchised voters of MI and FL when she agreed to the penalties and signed the pledge? The answer is that she didn’t give a damn about them until her strategy to sew it up by Feb 5th didn’t work — and, in fact, truth be known, she still doesn’t care about them, except as faceless bodies that can unfairly get her more delegates.

Also, for the Obama supporters, if the tally is such that he gets the 2,025, then so be it as well.
I didn’t want you to think I’m totally one-sided on the issue.

Well, of course Obama wants to split it 50/50.. do these liberal elites like Dodd even CARE how the voters voted? Sheesh, it’s like they think no one showed up to vote.. DINGBATS.. these people took time off work, showed up, stood in line.. and by god, their voices should count.. not some arbitrary division that isn’t true to the vote.. where are we, Iraq? Where Saddam won every election by 90%.. well, hell, let’s just make up the numbers.. who cares what the people say.
I am ashamed of Democrats like Dodd. Ashamed, Ashamed.

Ha ha ha!
People, people, people, don’t strain the brain over the misbehavior of the lost leaders of who place disenfranchise their voters, the Primarycontest will be over before Florida and Michigan.
And guess who the winner will be, not the ‘inevitable candidate’ but the reputable candidate? lol

Florida and Michigan should have left
their PRIMARIES ALONE!
Tis is the price they will pay.

Both candidates agreed that these votes would not be seated. (Wink, Wink) Hillary made a visit to Florida while Obama ran TV ads. Voters went to the polls. Seat Florida and re-do Michigan and let’s hear the Dean Scream……
YEEEEEEE…..HAAAAAAWW
Pathetic!

jac13: it’s good to know there are still
some intelligent people in this country!
Your comments are right on!

From this side of the fence (Canada), It looks like the Obama people are behaving just like the the “Present” vote he carried out in Chicago. No firm stance – just wait and see how the wind blows. Just re-vote already! -
The whole world is waiting!

Hi all! Interesting posting by most. Just to share some info that might clarify things for all:
FL voter turnout for the 2008 dem primaries was double the turnout for the 2004 primaries. This was attributed by the experts to the tax issue on the ballot.
MI voter turnout for the 2008 dem primaries was almost 5 times as much as the 2004 primaries although it was less than anticipated. DNC volunteers stated they urged all the voters to turnout to vote because they expected the vote to count eventually. This is the reason the Obama and Edwards camps instructed people to vote for undecided since they could not get their names back on the ballot.
It is abundantly clear that the will of the voters was cast in both states. Clinton stated before and after the primaries in those states that she would ask their delegates to be seated and expected any democratic nominee would do the same.
I dont object to a re-vote primary since that is how those states’ voters know how to vote. I do object to a caucus because they will be too confused and angry. I dont object to counting the votes as is but suspect a revote will resoundly increase Clinton’s delegates (the most likely reason Obama doesnt want that to happen). The cheapest and quickest way is to not punish the voters for Dean’s BS and simply count as is even giving Obama the undecided in MI even though they were not likely all his. Edwards was quite popular in MI. If the DNC feels the need to punish someone, they can disallow SDs that served on the state committees in both states.

Just an FYI, TX caucus related delegates have not been allocated by TX. Per the SOS, votes are still being counted and caucus processes being investigated. They expect to have some results by March 29, 2008. Several of the MSM sites are counting those delegates in their projections which is inaccurate. Several of them are also counting the voters in TX twice for the popular vote which is inaccurate. FL and MI are not the only states in question.

THE Republicans had the same issue with both states yet they could sit down like adults and reach a solution,mean while the Democrates look like fools.Its a sad day in America when a mans ego rules the Democratic party

The FL and MI politcal leadership are the ones who should be punished for their decision to move up their primaries.
Here’s a thought: Seat the delegates according to the results of the elections that were originally held, BUT strip MI & FL of their SUPER DELEGATES. This punishes the people who were responsible for the decision, while still allowing the voice of the people to be heard. In addition, it reminds other states party leaders that there WILL BE consequences for not following the rules of the party, and the party elite will be the ones that will pay the price.
The results of this plan?
Clinton is awarded 73 from MI, 105 from FL for a total of 1421 pledged delegates
Obama is awarded 55 delegates from MI (total of uncommitted), 67 from FL for a total of 1526 pledged delegates
Edwards is awarded 13 from FL
Clinton “wins” MI & FL, and the voters voices are heard (which is what she says she wants.)
Obama remains in front in the delegate count with over 100 more delegates.
Works for me.

Rules are made to be obeyed. The two states were stripped of their delegates for bringing forward their election. In order to follow the rules. The delegates should either remain unceded or fresh elections (this time a caucus) should be held at the end of all other primaries, that way their votes count, the states learn their lesson and the states get what they always wanted.. a bit more relevance in the scheme of things – but this time by adhering to the rules and not by breaking it. If they had only obeyed the party rules they would have been as relevant as every state has been in this unique election, without running the risk of losing out.

In a close election like this, it is not fair to take the previous results as it is as Obama could not campaign and he did not have the name recognition as Clinton had-
Splitting the delegates evenly 50/50 between both candidates is not democratic and a very bad idea -
Redo the election based on its old format(primaries) sounds like a reasonable plan
Old and interesting article from chicago tribune titled Obama knows his way around a ballot
Excerpts from the article is below
The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it
Could there be a pattern in using legal procedures to decide the outcome of an election rather than people deciding it?
What kind of change in politics this is?
This is a close election, Only fair way is people from FL and MI to decide the outcome of their election results. If not, then once again the election process would not be a level playing field