Mar 6, 2008 3:55pm

Florida Dems Seek ‘Re-Do’ Primary

ABC News’ Rick Klein and Elisha Wood Report: Florida Democrats would be willing to hold a "re-do" presidential primary this spring if the Democratic National Committee comes up with the approximately $18 million price tag, Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said Thursday.

Nelson, who is actively seeking an accommodation that would allow Florida delegates to be seated at the Democratic National Convention, said the DNC should pay for a new primary because party leaders voted not to accept the “legal election that we had on Jan. 29.”

"Now, to run an election like that [held] in January costs the taxpayers of Florida $18 million. The governor of Florida has already said that the state of Florida is not going to support it, nor do I think the taxpayers of Florida should do it," Nelson said Thursday on the ABC NewsNow program "Politics Live"

"So the question is, will the Democratic committee, will they pay for a re-do of a full-up election?" Nelson said.

A DNC spokeswoman, Karen Finney, dismissed the suggestion that the national party pay for a second primary, saying that the party needs to build up cash to help the Democratic nominee win in November.

"At this point, we can’t afford to do that," Finney said. "We need all our resources for the presidential campaign."

Since the beginning of last year, the DNC has raised about $60.5 million — nearly $40 million less than the Republican National Committee — and has struggled to maintain a cash balance of more than $5 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The states of Florida and Michigan were stripped of their delegates by the DNC in response to their decisions to hold primaries in January — before the party-sanctioned window for such contests opened on Feb. 5.

With the race between Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton lingering longer than most observers expected, party leaders in the states — and nationally — are scrambling to find a way to have the Florida and Michigan delegations seated, to avoid an ugly, divisive scene at the convention.

Though some in the party have suggested holding a caucus instead of a primary — a more cost-effective option — Nelson rejected that possibility out of hand.

"It would be manifestly unfair to replace a primary with a caucus, in which only a fraction of the 1.7 million Floridians who voted in the January 29 . . . Democratic primary would participate," Nelson wrote Thursday in a letter to Dean.

A spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party, Mark Bubriski, said Nelson’s proposal would be "acceptable to consider," as long as the Obama and Clinton campaigns sign off on it.

Another option, Bubriski said, would be to hold a mail-in primary, where ballots would be sent to all Florida Democrats. Such an option would likely cost less than $6 million, but Florida Democrats would again want the national party to cover the expense.

User Comments

From Florida’s track record I’d say a caucus would work better. Floridians are less likely to screw it up the way they usually screw up their elections.
Anyone remember a fella by the name of President Albert G.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | March 6, 2008, 4:01 pm 4:01 pm

Now TCG, why would you want the Democratic party to have a caucus? You wouldn’t be worried about stopping Hillary Clinton from becoming a competitor to McCain, so you want a caucus which would favor Obama?

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | March 6, 2008, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm

TCG, they don’t hold caucuses in the general election as Obama will find out in those red state he won, so why play stupid here? FL and MI deserve to have their voices heard. And boy do some of those FL folks have an earful ready for the Obama folks. They know who refused to allow their delegates to be seated. Same with MI.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm

Anyone who advocates a caucus is suggesting that voters be disenfranchised.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm

Personally, I dont see why new primaries are even needed. In the case of FL, Obama had an advantage because he campaigned there by running TV ads and still lost by a significant margin. In MI, if we simply give him all the undecided votes (which were not really all his), we are giving him an advantage there also. Clinton won MI by a significant amount also.
So it appears to me that even when having the advantage in both states, the only reason he objects is because he lost.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm

Um lets see, they are whining because; when they broke the rules that they agreed to and KNEW that their primaries would not count prior to having them, they went ahead and had them anyway. Now they want the DNC to pay for their intentional violations of the rules. So it was the local groups that screwed the voters don’t blame the DNC at large. That is like blaming the cop when you get a ticket for speeding.

Posted by: Louis | March 6, 2008, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm

The caucus’s are a circus. Just read about the problems in Texas they had. Have a primary and let the people vote
properly and in private.

Posted by: Brenda | March 6, 2008, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm

Florida and Michigan knew what the rules and penalties were before their elected officials, Congressmen and Governors alike, decided to move their primaries against the DNC’s rules. Now they are mad and want their delegates to count. It is unfair to change the rules in the middle of the game and Howard Dean and the DNC is right. EVERYONE knew the rules before the start and everyone agreed to those rules. If the Florida and Michigan voters are going to mad at anyone, then they should be mad at their elected officials who voted and passed laws to move the date, knowing what the consequences would be. The elected officials of those states made their voters votes not count. Not the DNC. And I like both Hillary and Obama but fair is fair. For her to now want those votes to count, shows a person that you can’t trust when the cards are stacked against her. I have lost all respect for her for demanding these delgates be seated. She should have said that they knew the rules and agreed with Howard Dean and the DNC. It just goes to show you that in her, you won’t have change because it’s win at all costs…lie, cheat, steal. How can you trust anything else she says when even Ray Charles can see she wants to change the rules that she agreed to in the beginning because she would benefit. She’s not even asking for a do-over. Why, because she know’s that she can’t beat Mr. Obama by a wide enough margin in either of those 2 states to push ahead of him in the delegate count. The total thing is disgusting and this is why people get so disenfranchised with the system.

Posted by: Derek | March 6, 2008, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm

DCvoter, how can you lose in a state where you didn’t campaign and in another state when you were not on the ballot? How can you call any such vote valid when people who knew their votes would not be counted didn’t bother to show up? there is no way the current results are valid.

Posted by: Louis | March 6, 2008, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm

I would bet new primaries would give Clinton more delegates. I wonder if there are any side bet websites setting up for that yet. LOL
If money is the determining factor, it wouldnt surprise me to see independent financial sources pay for them.
Speaking of oddities, does anyone find it odd that it was a republican controlled legislature in Florida and a republican dominated senate in Michigan that moved up the primaries knowing it would disenfranchise all of the democratic voters in those state primaries? Seems to me the state Democratic committees are not very smart in those states!

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm

Louis, let me try and get your point. You, a so called democrat, want to disenfranchise two swing state and give the republicans a two to nothing advantage even before the general begin? Just so Obama can maintain his lead? And you all call yourselves more educated than Clinton folks? Get real.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm

It seems to me a bit nervy for the folks in charge of the Florida Democrats to ask for $18 million to re-do the primary they messed up by choosing a date that went against the agreement they had with the National Democrats.

Posted by: Lyd | March 6, 2008, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm

Louis – the voter turnouts in MI and FL were significant… in other words the voters made sure their voices were heard. Obama did run tv ads in FL and Clinton did not so he had an advantage and still lost. In MI, the undecided vote (all candidates except Clinton and Kucinich) could be given to Obama and he still lost. That sends a pretty clear message to me… FL and MI voters went for Clinton greater than 50% in both states.
Brenda – the caucuses in TX were not the only tainted aspect of the TX results. In TX, the delegates are apportioned based on registered Dems in the areas. In other words, areas without a lot of registered Dems but with lots of voters casting votes in the primaries get fewer delegates resulting in unfair representation in the delegate count. This was analyzed and show to benefit Obama because the areas he took (urban) have an unfair number more delegates. Even after that, he still lost TX popular votes and 2/3 of the state voted for Clinton over 50%. So her win there is actually more significant than the delegate count implies. Rules are rules but these are things the SDs consider.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm

The DNC definitely should not pay for it. Let the states who broke the rules pay, and consider it a fine for breaking the rules in the first place.
Also, Louis has a valid point. There’s no way of knowing how many voters didn’t go to the polls because they knew their votes wouldn’t be counted.

Posted by: Don | March 6, 2008, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm

Hey Derek. You say we knew the rules. True, but we did not make the decision. The state legislature did and the FL legislature is about 2 to 1 republican. We are being relegated to second class and told our votes won’t count because a Republican conrolled legislature did this to us. DON’T TELL US OUR VOTES SHOULD NOT COUNT. And by the way, we all have TVs and newspapers in FL, so when we voted it was from an informed standpoint.

Posted by: Roger | March 6, 2008, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm

Lyd then come right out and say you Obama folks want to disenfranchise the voters in both Fl and MI. There will be no caucuses for you guys to run up the score come the general. In light of this, I’d be interested in hearing your version of how Obama will win the White House.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm

DC Voter, Nice to meet you here. Hope you having fun. Just came over from MyDD where Obama’s Feb 55mil is generating some buzz. Bottomline, with that kind of money and he couldnt close the deal, infact losing as badly as he did in the popular vote, he should concede. I will win the GE on that budget. Advert dont sell bad product. On Florida/MI, i dont think we need fear a re-vote but it must be in a primary. Closed!

Posted by: lluluadorl | March 6, 2008, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm

caucus is a cheating game. If the general election is based on caucus, then go head in Florida and Michigan. For example, Hillary won TX primary but she may lose her caucus in TX

Posted by: mike | March 6, 2008, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm

People, Louis is absolutely right! Everyone’s vote should count. Everyone’s! You can be sure there were voters who didn’t show up because they knew their state broke the rules.

Posted by: Don | March 6, 2008, 4:42 pm 4:42 pm

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the VOTERS of Michigan and Florida didn’t decide when to hold their primaries…but they are going to decide who to vote for in November. I think the DNC needs to be mending some bridges.

Posted by: Bryan | March 6, 2008, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm

Caucuses are not representive of the will of the voters. WA state and TX are both proof of that. Reasons relate to the limited time and the lack of secret balloting.
Obama’s voting support of students and well to do liberal lattes give him an advantage there because they can afford to take the time to caucus. Working people usually cannot caucus (the majority). Non-working people like housewives and the retired folks are often subject to peer pressure the same as college students are.
All things considered, caucuses not only do not represent the will of the majority but the Obama camp obviously uses this knowledge to their advantage and wants the caucuses to be the “re-vote” for that reason.
Caucuses are by nature not a democratic process and it amazes me they are even allowed by the Democratic party. However, the SD vote is supposed to offset the unfair aspect but of course the Obama camp does not want that to happen… yet he calls himself a democrat. LOL

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm

Don, the folks from Fl and ML know who kept their delegates out to this point and it’s the Obama people. And if you all want to have primarys now than expect Hillary to win by larger amount.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm

I agree completely with Don – my parents live in Florida and didn’t vote because they knew it wouldn’t count. They believe in RULES. You can’t change the rules in the middle of the game. MI & FL should not be given special treatment and if the voters are going to be MAD at someone, they need to be angry with their legislators, not the democratic party. I’m sorry for those in Florida, especially my parents who deserve to have their vote counted, however, the residents of Florida should have been protesting this LONG before it became obvious their delegate votes might make a difference. Hindsight is 20/20 they say….

Posted by: Jen | March 6, 2008, 4:53 pm 4:53 pm

RLE, how can you be so ill informed? The Republican for instance were 9% of the Texas vote with the majority breaking for Obama! That’s right, Obama!

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm

Oh shades of the hanging chads. Get over it and let this circus run its course. Why have the taxpayers foot another 18 million bill over something as stupid as this. It is a total waste of the taxpayers money. We could use that 18 milion to help chileren who are hungry and older folks with medications etc.

Posted by: papasangel59 | March 6, 2008, 4:57 pm 4:57 pm

Dogsoldier, it isn’t the “Obama people”. So easy to sling blame. The decision to not have the delegates count was made when FLORIDA decided to move the date to an unqualified time.

Posted by: Jen | March 6, 2008, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm

Bryan, you are slightly wrong so I will correct since you said to. LOL
The republican controlled legislature in FL with the agreement of the Florida Democrat Committee agreed to change the primary date even after the DNC said no. So the state committee was either duped or stupid but they could not do it without the legislature so that is where I lay the blame. The same is true for MI.
Of course the republicans in control of those state legislatures are refusing to fund new primaries to benefit democratic voters.
I think if there are new vote events, they should be primaries because that is how those states vote. You cannot expect to re-educate voters in such a short timeframe. The result would be less valid than the primaries already held. Perhaps some independent monies will surface on behalf of what is best for America.
I am still betting new primaries in both states will give Clinton more delegates than if they use the current results.
Hiya llulu… Clinton raised 3 mill yesterday in one day of online contributions. The MO has definitely shifted. The Reps historically outraise and outspend Dems in every race yet Dems still get elected because the majority of voters are not rich. So I dont think this hype about his 55 mill in Feb means squat… especially when we are talking about democrats left to vote being working class majorities that he tends to not do well with.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm

WestCoastMessenger
I was just expressing concern for the voters of Florida. Things seem to go badly for them and so often. These people have the worst luck. The caucus would be a good deal for them.
With a caucus all they need to do is show up. No dern hanging chads, no confounding butterfly ballots, no baffling touch screens, no disappearing electronic votes – none of that confusing stuff. Just show up for a head count and then wander off toward home. QED. I mean come on, democracy is important, dood, and Florida screws up so much that Castro, himself, has offered to send assistance north.
And the caucus would save the taxpayer money that could be used on taxcuts and other import things.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | March 6, 2008, 4:59 pm 4:59 pm

Papasangel59 you want to disenfranchise the voters of FL and ML? There will be no caucuses in the general for you to run up the score and now you want to give the republicans a two to nothing head start in those two states in the general. Boy, I’d be interested in your version of how Obama will win White House now.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 5:02 pm 5:02 pm

Jen see DCVoter answer above. Just a question Jen what would your position be had Obama won?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm

Pardon me Jen I forgot to say it was nice to meet you.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 6, 2008, 5:08 pm 5:08 pm

To Derek-Any comment on Obama`s refusal to abide by the rule that the superdelegates can vote for whomever they choose?

Posted by: luke | March 6, 2008, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm

The mail in ballot to all those already registered as democrats by Jan 29th is the best option. They should split the difference at 3 million each it seems reasonable.

Posted by: s.b. | March 6, 2008, 5:14 pm 5:14 pm

Yea well we all know that obama only likes rules that favour him.

Posted by: s.b. | March 6, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm

For all those who say that FL and MI should count I ask you this. Do you think Hillary is concerned with votes counting are just votes that favor her counting? Had Obama won these states would she still want them to count are would she argue that they shouldn’t count? If she is worried about them being seated then divide the delegates evenly and that way those states still get their say at the convention. But honestly the only fair assessment is either a do over are they don’t count. That way neither candidate is punished. Without campaiging Obama would not have won any of the states he has won so it is not fair to say she would have won these states had they campaigned. She won based on name not issues. So again are her motives in the best interest of voters are herself?

Posted by: common sense | March 6, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm

“There’s no way of knowing how many voters didn’t go to the polls because they knew their votes wouldn’t be counted.” That is their own fault for not showing up to vote; they should be held accountable for their non-action. People fight for the right to vote and they casually decide to not vote. The Florida Dems had no say in the primary date as the date is set by the Republican controlled Florida legislature. Why punish FL Dems for what FL Republicans set for the primary date? I’ll be happy to vote McCain along with the other FL Dems to stand up to the DNC. No more bullying by the DNC and Obama supporters.

Posted by: Drew | March 6, 2008, 5:19 pm 5:19 pm

Comrade Dogsoldier: DNC rules keep FL and MI out, not Obama. As you may recall, Clinton stayed on the MI ballot, saying “oh, it’s not going to matter anyhow”. And now she wants MI to count, even though she was the only one on the ballot. Even you must agree this is absurd.
If not, please, comrade, tell me all about this new Soviet system for the proletariat to express its will…

Posted by: Tungsten | March 6, 2008, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

Voters in Ohio were mislead by claims that the Obama Campaign had contacted the Canadian government about NAFTA. Now it turns out it was the Clinton Camapign.
There should be a do-over of the Ohio election. This whole thing is bringing back memories of the eight years of Clinton Sleaze.

Posted by: William Shier | March 6, 2008, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

Florida and Michigan MUST be given an opportunity to be heard and counted or this election will be meaningless. THE DNC WILL RECONSIDER or ELSE Lose Democrats to the other side! This al seems pretty contrived to me, who master minded this (Slick Willey?) There is still time to make the corrections. DEAN: You play games with this election and you WILL see BUSH III (McCain) in the White House. You’re going to alienate a lot of good Democrats! Stop screwing around!

Posted by: michael basham | March 6, 2008, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm

Rules are rules folks. MI and FL do not count, no matter what Clinton says. She evidently will stop at nothing to steal this nomination.
The case for HRC to get nothing from the MI vote is cut and dried. Anyone saying otherwise is a fool or a scoundrel.
It would also be unfair to count FL: nobody can possibly disagree that Obama always does better in states where he has a chance to campaign. Texas – he was down 20 points, and 2 weeks later pulled even. Ohio, down 20, pulled nearly even before HRC’s negative barrage.
Is the FL situation unfair because the republicans moved the primary? Yes, but both campaigns agreed not to contest it. Hillary had a head start, since she was the establishment-anointed candidate, so it’s unfair to assume she earned the win.

Posted by: Tungsten | March 6, 2008, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm

The Michigan Primary was 55% Clinton to 40%. How is that a significant win? There were a lot of voters wanted anyone but Clinton to win. They either need to have a re-do or they not be counted. It would be unfair to all concerned if they are counted now.

Posted by: befair1265 | March 6, 2008, 5:35 pm 5:35 pm

maybe because 55% went Clinton and the rest was split between 4 people.
umm 1 + 5= 12 me obama supporter.

Posted by: eleven22 | March 6, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm

for all u people who think a caucas is the answer just look at the TX results, over 2 million voted in the primary , they barely broke 100K in the caucas. Thats including the reports in the dallas news about obama supporters locking the hillary supporters out of the buildings. There are police records of this showing up in dallas too. Caucassing should be ousted!

Posted by: eleven22 | March 6, 2008, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm

common sense – actually, Clinton did not agree with the removal of delegates from MI and FL before the voting began. So you are off base and misinformed if you think she is not concerned about the rights of the voters to have their voice heard.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

Doesn’t it seem a teeny bit hypocritical for the Obama supporters to accuse Hillary of “changing the rules” by attempting to seat delegates from MI and FL, while at the same time pushing to switch from primaries to caucuses in a re-vote so they have a better chance to win?
One reason I support Hillary is because she is so obviously willing to crawl over broken glass to become President. Anyone who wants it less doesn’t deserve it, and won’t give it their best once there (best example is G.W. Bush). Anyone who pretends to want it less is lying because they think it makes them look better (examples are Barack Obama and Fred Thompson).

Posted by: Chris NY, NY | March 6, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

Drew – i understand anger but you need to rethink your logic… you are mad at the republicans for moving the primaries knowing the democrats would be disenfranchised (they did not have to go through with it when the DNC said no)… but you are threatening to give your support to the republican nominee? lol

Posted by: DCVoter | March 6, 2008, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm

The statement that Obama ran ads in Fla. is a joke. He ran cable ads on National cable networks which broadcast everywhere, including Fla. Hillary went tio Fla. before the primary, claiming to be doing a fund raiser (wink, wink) and showed up after to claim victory. Quit trying to rewrite history.

Posted by: Dennis | March 6, 2008, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm

There are only 2 choices here people. Either the states of FL and MI pay for new primaries or their citizen votes will not count. The rules were set well in advance of any states set their election days. FL and MI legislators chose to move their elections to dates prior to Feb 5th, which, by the RULES was against DNC policies. If MI and FL voters want to complain, then they should be revolting against their state government. This has nothing to do with Obama or the DNC. Hillary should be ashamed to not support the RULES of the party she seeks to be the nominee of, this is such a foolish argument. You guys are putting the blame on the wrong people. If you feel disenfranchised, set up marches and rallies, bring class action suits against the FL and MI government, use your energy on something that can bring about change in your states. For FL folks, what difference does it make anyway, your state gov will fix the vote for repubs anyway when the general election comes in Nov.

Posted by: Marcus, Dallas TX | March 6, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm

Dennis – Both Hillary AND Obama went to FL to raise money before the primary. That was specifically allowed per the DNC rules. So what if she went afterwards to claim victory, if Obama thought he was going to win he would have shown up to.

Posted by: Chris NY, NY | March 6, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm

Chris, Give me a break, read the news from her events. They happend just before the vote. It was clearly a campaign event disguised as a fund raiser. Nobody was fooled.

Posted by: Dennis | March 6, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm

If I’ve heard “rules are rules” once, I’ve heard it a dozen times.
Let’s all agree that the rules were broken. What I object to is the decision to strip each state of its entire delegations.
The DNC Rules Committe took four months to determine how it was going to handle the rebellious states of Florida and Michigan.
Perhaps we should be objecting to the extreme consequences, when it would have been just as easy for the DNC to unseat just half of each state’s delegation, or the strip the super delegates of voting rights, and/or prohibit state party leaders from holding important party positions or voting on important party matters for a term of 3-5 years.
Then you’re punishing the folks who got Florida and Michigan into this mess, without penalizing its citizens of their right to vote.

Posted by: OhioNative | March 6, 2008, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm

This is all a game of chicken. There is a easy solution. Check out Oregon. They have votes by mail. It would not cost anywhere near $18 million and the Fla. and Mi. Demo parties could pay for it by having the Hillary and Obama campaigns send out an appeal to all their donors asking to help pay. If either camp refused to send out the appeal, we will know who really wants to disenfranchise voters.

Posted by: Dennis | March 6, 2008, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm

If they don’t do something to help FL they can kiss this election goodbye that is for sure, and it will be worse if Obama is the nominee he will never be able to win FL democrats, so he and his supporters can play fast and loose with this thinking he has it in the bag with his nonsense, he will not be able to win this election without FL.

Posted by: SJ | March 6, 2008, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm

Louis—
Thats a little bit lopsided. In Florida both candidates were on the ballot. Neither candidates campaigned. The public was aware of both circumstances.
The DNC should award the delegates based upon those facts, without spending the redo dollar. In Michigan neither candidate campaigned. Clinton was on the ballot Obama wasn’t so Clinton had the advantage-spend the money for the redo.

Posted by: TheShadow Knows | March 6, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm

The DNC needs to pay for the do overs, because they are the ones who decided to “punish” a couple of million people for something they had no control over. Especially in Florida, when it was a Republican administration who set the date for the Democratic primary. Maybe Howard Dean is another chauvanist who is afraid Hillary may pick up enough delegates from these two contests to pull ahead. After Dean self-destructed his own primary campaign, how did we end up with him as the head of the DNC? What moron made that decision?

Posted by: Melanie | March 6, 2008, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm

Melanie—
Well it seems to me that all things were equal for the candidates in Florida and the public voted the way they wanted. Couldn’t that one be left as it is?

Posted by: TheShadow Knows | March 6, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

They had control over it they voted for the dumb Florida Rebublicans thats there fault. There the one that moved up the elections not the DNC.

Posted by: America | March 6, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm

Boy oh boy and just think how America is going to be under a Hillary Clinton Administration. Wow! God help us.

Posted by: America | March 6, 2008, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm

I think whichever candidate pushes the hardest to get Florida and Michigan’s delegation seated will be appreciated all the more for it.
Both the candidates and the people in those states are stuck with the decision of the respective state legislatures, the state party leaders and the DNC Rules Committee ruling.
By agreeing not to campaign, the candidates agreed to abide by the DNC’s sanctions, but that should not be construed to mean that they agreed with the actual sanctioning decision.
I’ve read that the candidates who withdrew their names in Michigan, did so to show their support of the DNC decision, while those who left their name on the ballot simply agreed to abide by the sanctions, without agreeing with the DNC’s actions.
Remember Dennis Kucinich was still in the race at that time, and he kept his name on the ballot, as did Senator Dodd if I’m not mistaken.

Posted by: OhioNative | March 6, 2008, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm

She creates a storm were ever she goes Ms. Conflict thats Hillary!

Posted by: America | March 6, 2008, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm

All you Obambites don’t get it. But I’ll help you out. Here what you need to know about the Clintons:
Rules apply to other people. Now you know. It is that simple, really.
Or as Brotha Machievelli tells us – “The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present.”
Just remember this as you grapple with these gals (and some guys).

Posted by: Da Inspecta | March 6, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm

I don’t Know.
Here in Arizona if you riot and burn they don’t take names, they shoot your ###.

Posted by: TheShadow Knows | March 6, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm

Also they would not let Independents vote in that election also according to C-Span

Posted by: America | March 6, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm

Here we go it’s on now all hell is going to break out.

Posted by: America | March 6, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

Boy oh boy and just think how America is going to be under a Hillary Clinton Administration. Wow! God help us. She creates a storm were ever she goes Ms. Conflict thats Hillary!

Posted by: America | March 6, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

All hell should have broke out long before this. What difference should a day, week or month make to the DNC?

Posted by: TheShadow Knows | March 6, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

The citizens of Florida and Michigan certainly deserve to be represented at the Democratic convention.It would be outrageous to punish them because politicians in their states chose to have their primaries so early in the process.It is only fair that every state receive representation at the Republican and Democratic conventions.I fervently believe in liberty and democracy.If we want to maintain our republic, we need the participation of Americans from around the country.This includes the people of Florida and Michigan.It would go against the principles for which our nation stands to deny the citizens of Florida and Michigan delegates at the Democratic convention.

Posted by: Shawn M. Hussey | March 6, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm

Can anybody tell me why the democratic party should have to foot the bill for something that is Fla.’s fault in the first place? They knew there would consequences if they moved their primaries up and now they want someone else to pay for it?

Posted by: b. sutton | March 6, 2008, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm

The way things now stand, nobody wants to pay for a revote in Florida. Unless someone steps up to the plate on that one, the DNC will have to certify the existing or they don’t count at all. The whole thing is a rip for the Florida voters.

Posted by: ShadowKnows | March 6, 2008, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm

Fla. and Mich. voters were disenfranchised by there own state and party when they held an elections that violated the rules, were uncontested and in which the canidates were barred from campaigning. It is not a free election unless everyone participates and everyone can campaign. The Mich. and Fla. were no more free election than the Cuban or Russian elections. It is an insult to every voter in every other state that followed the rules to let the delagates chosen in an election that was not contested sit with delegates from free, contested elections.

Posted by: Dennis | March 6, 2008, 8:28 pm 8:28 pm

I agree. (and maybe I should have clarified this earlier) I in no way blame this on the citizens in Fla. and Mi., but someone in those states knew that there would be repercussions. So if anyone should be blamed, shouldn’t it be the persons in these states that were responsible for the move of the primary date?

Posted by: b. sutton | March 6, 2008, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm

Dennis, I agree with that up to this point. The circumstance was equal for
either candidate. The voters turned out in record numbers for Florida and they spoke. Michigan was a cluster screw and needs to be redone.

Posted by: ShadowKnows | March 6, 2008, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm

b.—
My point is can you justify spending 18M
on a revote in a state where neither candidate had an advantage?

Posted by: ShadowKnows | March 6, 2008, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm

Clinton hasn’t been focused only on his foundation; since leaving the White House in 2001, he has billed major corporations and other organizations more than $41 million for speeches. Salon has assembled a list of the organizations by combing through his wife’s Senate financial disclosure forms. Multiple speeches for one organization have been combined to show total payments to the former president. That list appears on the following page.
 
THERE SHOULD BE A LAW AGAINST PRESIDENTS BECOMING LOBBYIST

Posted by: BOB | March 6, 2008, 9:20 pm 9:20 pm

I agree that the states screwed up, so the states should have to pay for any revote.
And since its cheaper to caucus that’s the way to go.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | March 6, 2008, 9:25 pm 9:25 pm

Louis, I agree. Every one should have their vote count, however, I doubt that the Democrat voters did not know their vote would not count that day. Why the state even spent the money or did not make certain they were within the DNC rules prior to the voting process tells me they did not concern themselves with voter’s rights, at least not where the Primaries were concerned. And, isn’t Gov. Christi of FL for Obama? And, a re-vote? Would that be fair?

Posted by: pati | March 6, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm

Amazing how all of this is Hillary Clinton’s fault! Get real, people, this is just another screw-up by the DNC and Howard Dean. And in Michigan, Hillary Clinton did not take her name off the ballot as did Obama and most others, because she said to do so was to disenfranchise the voters. How prophetic! Howard Dean and the DNC couldn’t be doing the Republicans any more favors if they were on Karl Rove’s payroll!!

Posted by: sagesgram | March 6, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm

I’ve already voted in FL and I will not vote again. Having another primary will only change the outcome because less people will vote. It peaves me that my vote didn’t matter to begin with, so why would I want to vote again!

Posted by: Newsreader26 | March 6, 2008, 11:30 pm 11:30 pm

Whatever is decided, Florida needs to avoid the caucus circus.
Caucuses are the most worthless waste of time ever conceived.
The caucus mentality is akin to the commercial about herding cats.
They already voted once, and that is enough.
Just count the votes, and get on with it.

Posted by: ken | March 6, 2008, 11:36 pm 11:36 pm

If Clinton wants every voto to count why is she opposed to a redo in Florida. “Clinton has told U.S. News and World Report that she opposes any sort of do-over for Florida and she would not accept it if Michigan were to hold a caucus.”

Posted by: Robert | March 6, 2008, 11:50 pm 11:50 pm

Dennis – Obama did a fundraiser in FL the same day Clinton did. Both fundraisers were private events. Obama chose to buy national ads instead of ads just for the states he was supposed to. He willingly violated the rules.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 7, 2008, 12:23 am 12:23 am

Caucuses are the most undemocratic form of voting offered here in the USA. Texas proved it’s a circus; and, Washington state goes to show you how caususes drastically misrepresent the will of the people.
You can’t unring the bell in Florida or Michigan! LET THEIR VOTES COUNT AND MOVE ON; OTHERWISE YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE DISGRUNTLED DEMOCRATS NOT ONLY IN FL & MI, BUT HERE’S ON IN PA THAT WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN IN THE FALL!
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH AND THE DNC IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A PARTY LEFT AT THE END OF THIS BETTER GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER!

Posted by: PA Voter | March 7, 2008, 12:38 am 12:38 am

Let’s paint another scenario… a state holds a primary with a record turnout… there is some sort of snafu that leads to votes not being counted ina significant number of polling places (sound familiar)… some judges rule that it is too expensive and time consuming to count all the votes or have any re-dos so they decide to throw out anything questionable and use only a portion of the vote tally… in the end a significant number of voters are disenfranchised and the states representive votes do not represent the will of the voters… oh but wait that is ok because there was a precedent.. this situation is no different… voters do not want to be disenfranchised because republicans in their legislatures screwed them out of their votes counting once again
FL – both candidates were on the ticket, both campaigned nationally with full media coverage, Obama ran ads that aired in FL before the vote and he lost anyway, the turnout was double the turnout for the 2004 election so it more than represents the will of the voters, i say count FL as is
MI – Clinton, Kucinich, and Undecided were the choices, no one campaigned there, all campaigned nationally with media coverage, if we give all the undecided votes to Obama (even though they were not all his because there were 5 other candidates in that group) then that negates any advantage implied by name and he still loses, voter turnout in 2008 primaries was 5 times the turnout in 2004 primaries so it clearly reflects the will of the voters, i say count the vote as is
This is a fair a logical solution in the interest of the voters and taxpayer dollars.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 7, 2008, 12:50 am 12:50 am

Anti-Clinton hack – try using a legitimate math source instead of a MSM source… if Clinton wins 59% of the remaining delegates she passes Obama. Neither candidate can get 2025 without superdelegates. This will be decided with their input no matter what.

Posted by: DCVoter | March 7, 2008, 1:41 am 1:41 am

Yeah. How about those idiot caucus’s. Lets see. Where to begin. Never mind the waste of time red state causus’s that will never go Democrat anyway.
Nevada. Clinton wins by 6% , but Obama gets the extra delegate. Hows that for fair in a democracy?
Clinton beats Obama by 100,000 votes in texas, but WAIT, there is a tapdanced Caucus so you can vote twice. Wait. African american communities get more delegates than Latinos. Aint life grand?
How does one win by 4% in a primary of 2.7million voters, then LOSE by 10% or more in the same state caucus by the SAME VOTERS ?????
Question: How many ‘caucus’s are in the general election?
Oh. Yes. Washington state. Caucus again. Wins by 27% .
They have a PRIMARY 2 weeks later. He wins by THREE .
How does that makes sense? See a pattern here ?
Heres the kickers. Ready for it?
Michigan and Florida. Both Clinton states.
Lets not have them count. Obamas fault? No.
But for the 50th time, pretty damn good luck for Obama.
He has caught every single break there is.

Posted by: tomdavie | March 7, 2008, 2:07 am 2:07 am

Because both candidates, Hillary and Obama have their names on the ballot, redo the primary in Florida is unfair and unconstitutional. We should respect Florida voters’ decision on Jan/29/2008. Why they (the voters in Florida and Michigan) can’t vote before 02/05 while the voters from other states such as Iowa, New Hampshire can do it. Are they born different? Any way, can Floridians revote in 2000 General Election? I wish and the world might be different now. At least, we might not see $3.60 per gallon of gas. And 4000 of dead US soldiers might still alive.

Posted by: stock_craft | March 7, 2008, 2:24 am 2:24 am

DCVoter,
I agree, none of them, Hillary or Obama can get 2025 delegates. Why the media always mention Hillary problem instead of Obama?

Posted by: stock_craft | March 7, 2008, 2:30 am 2:30 am

The voters of every state should have a fair chance to have their say heard and votes counted and this should apply for FL and MI as well. There was no foul play or vote tampering; both candidates had an equal share of campaigning; what happened was an irregularity otherwise everything was conducted in fair manner. To leave these two states out of the contention certainly will not give a just decision on the right choice of candidate at the end of the day. Therefore the voters of Florida and Michigan must in all fairness be recognized if the contest is to be regarded as a democratically election process.

Posted by: Rajan | March 7, 2008, 3:31 am 3:31 am

Howard Dean needs to fired from the DNC.He’s been nothing but a joke by allowing these caucuses to go on. Get rid of these stupid caucus and just have primaries with winner take all. Why should any one have to vote twice? That’s got be the most idiotic thing ever.

Posted by: MR | March 7, 2008, 4:29 am 4:29 am

I compared the projected delegate counts from the Obama and Clinton camps (they dont agree) and the AP (which also doesnt agree) and various MSM sites (which also dont agree).
Just for kicks, I researched the actual delegate count instead of using the MSM and camp projections. The race is actually much closer than being portrayed due to conventions, incomplete counts, etc. Here is the actual:
Obama 1120
Clinton 1083.5
Other 12
Unallocated 428.5
Remaining 611
5 States have incomplete results
11 states have conventions as late as 6/29
2 states are currently stripped – if they vote total needed changes
The unallocated delegates are where everyone differs as to how they are going to vote. With a close race, the slight variation that usually occurs can tip the election. Bottom line is – the latest convention is 6/29 so we really wont have official numbers before the convention until then. If there are revotes in MI and FL who knows when those will happen. Then if it is still close, the SD’s dont cast official votes until the convention in August. Gotta love politics!

Posted by: DCVoter | March 7, 2008, 5:16 am 5:16 am

If the media had exposed Obama’s Rezko affair during the early part of the primary, there might not be any Obamamania because right now those who voted for Obama are wishing they could have a redo of the voting so they can change their vote and could have voted Hillary. This is the fault of the media who treated Obama with kid gloves. Just three days of showing Obama hugging Rezko in jovial mood, the Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio voters were intelligent enough to discern who is the real Obama. Super delegates will have to decide with good judgment who is the best choice between Obama and Hillary. No amount of numbers will determine who should be the rightful nominee. Obama is not strong enough to lead this nation, his past life or maybe present life now is full of secrets. A trasparent personality makes him trustworthy but he decided to cover up and tell lies instead. During the debate with Hillary he said that “I only have 5 minutes of realtionship with Rezko but it turn out he disclosed( in 2007) that they have a house hunting in 2007 and then in the trial of Rezko,the lawyer of Rezko presented an evidence that Obama and Rezko are having a relationship that is more than acquintance. Obama should set this clear to regain his credibility among super delegates who will decide on his fate. His big corporate financial supporters like Execon will have to exert effort and influence in convincing the super delegates because their money and efforts in his campaign will just go down the drain. The best policy is HONESTY AND SELF RESPECT

Posted by: ds | March 7, 2008, 5:23 am 5:23 am

MR – I plugged your suggestion into the spreadsheet. Without MI and FL, if each state were winner take all, this is what the current tally would be:
Clinton 1430
Obama 1214

Posted by: DCVoter | March 7, 2008, 5:35 am 5:35 am

Rules are rules I agree. Do over required reinstatement not appropriate.
BUT lets travel back in time………..
Polls show Hillary with a big lead in nearly all states especially the big ones. Obama sets a game plan to target all the smaller states. DNC offer to eliminate the vote in FL and Michigan. This allows Obama to conserve cash, rein in possible Clinton momentum and restrict her delegate tally.
So yes Hillary thought she could win without FL and MI but it also suited Obama to keep them out. So they both followed the rules for their own self serving reasons. There are no good guys here. Political expediency on both parts.
Otherwise Obama who is so keen on us observing the voice of the people would have cried out for a resolution to enable proper primaries to hear that voice.

Posted by: Puhlease | March 7, 2008, 6:54 am 6:54 am

The rules allow the states to submit a plan (e.g. “do-over”) to select delegates. “Do overs” are the way to go and the approach should be via primaries vs. caucuses as they was how the primaries were set up originally. It is unfortunate that someone has to pay for the “do-overs” and I fault the state legislatures for this. For the greater good of the party now and in the general election they need to be done.

Posted by: Jerry | March 7, 2008, 8:10 am 8:10 am

Democrats are trying to invalidate Florida votes… again? They must really hate Florida.

Posted by: jijalagi | March 7, 2008, 8:22 am 8:22 am

WHY DON’T BOTH CANDIDATES SPLIT THE COST OF A REVOTE IN BOTH MICH. AND FLA. THEY BOTH HAVE THE MONEY,AND NEITHER OF THEM WANT’S TO GET OUT OF THE RACE.IT WOULD BE ONLY FAIR TO BARACK OBAMA. HE WASN’T EVEN ON THE BALLOT IN MICH. AND HE DIDN’T CAMPAIGN IN FLA. BECAUSE  HE FOLLOWED THE RULES. HILLARY CLINTON CAN QUIT HER WHINING EVEN THOUGH SHE AGREAD TO THE RULES FROM THE START.

Posted by: JANET GLAZIER | March 7, 2008, 8:45 am 8:45 am

A regular primary would cost around $9M and caucuses would be half that; per state. After all that money is spent, with proportional representation, the end result will be a net gain for either candidate of maybe 10 delegates. Why not do it the Oregon way… by mail.
Unless one of these candidates gets over 75% from each of the remaining states and a good number of Super Duper Delegates join the bandwagon, it has to go to convention. I hope that it goes all the way… I would be fascinated to see how they campaign in Puerto Rico.

Posted by: smartprimate | March 7, 2008, 8:59 am 8:59 am

As a resident of Michigan, I am aware of what actually went on leading up to the primary. Obama and Edwards chose to take their names off the ballot in contrast to Clinton and Kucinich. Later, there was a concerted effort by the campaigns of Obama and Edwards as the “uncommitted” voice on the ballot to try to embarrass then front runner (Clinton). Significant media coverage directed voters to vote uncommitted if their candidate’s name was not on the ballot. There was heavy emphasis placed on voting and there was turnout. Senator Clinton still prevailed 55% to 40%.
In Florida, where I have family living, both Senators Clinton and Obama had their names on the ballot. There was nothing preventing a voter from voting for the candidate of their choice. It may be perceived as a “beauty contest” but the voices of the Florida citizens decided between the candidates and Senator Clinton prevailed.
I don’t believe there is a need to redo the electoral process in these states.
The way to resolve this situation – Give Senator Obama the “uncommitted” vote of 40 % in MI and allow Florida’s vote to stand with respect to these candidates.
Penalize MI and Florida by taking away the power of all of their superdelegates to have an impact on the nomination.

Posted by: LD | March 7, 2008, 10:30 am 10:30 am

why are you people still bashing the canidates? This is about Fl. and MICH not which canidate is better fit for the job. Stay on task here. The voters did not make that decisison and they should not be penalized. What’s fair is fair, let both candiates campaign and see the outcome.

Posted by: oquail | March 7, 2008, 10:43 am 10:43 am

Hello all, Hillary just said or said recently that she will not support a caucas in Mich or a do over in Florida, now who thinks she cares about the American people? She is interested in winning that’s it. Wyoming, Mississippi, pennsylvania don’t let her get away with this complete disregard of the American people and her willingness to side with McCain even though it’s tearing the party up.DNC and Super delegates need to step in and back her down, I know they are treading gingerly because of Bill’s position as former president but enough is enough.

Posted by: rle | March 7, 2008, 10:55 am 10:55 am

WOW! If this isn’t the dumbest argument in the history of politics. You people can’t see this was a BLANTANT conspiracy by the Republican party of FLA. The Democratic chair of the state of Florida said they had a choice when this was voted on, and they decided to go with the Repubs decision to VIOLATE their own party’s rules. The consequences were already know and Hillary agreed, there is video evidence of this all over the net. Now, because she PRESUMED that she would have the nomination wrapped up on Super Tuesday (Feb 5th) and it didn’t happen, she now is for the disenfranchised voters of FLA. PLEASE, this is an easy, clear and precise decision by the Republican party of Florida to make a mockery of the Democratic National Party election process. What’s even worst is the fact that most REAL voters in FLA are repubs, and the state will not be won by neither Hillary nor Obama in Nov, because no grassroot organizations were establish by none of the democratic canidates to empower the voters that have NEVER voted. This is exactly what the Republican Party of Florida wants. It’s just so, so, so sad that none of you in here sees this. You are just either so enraptured by your canidate of choice or you hate the other to the point that you have to sling personal attacks. Its just so disheatening to see this historic run reduced to the pettiness that here in this blog and so many on the internet.
WAKE UP PEOPLE! IT’S TIME FOR A CHANGE FROM THIS SAME OLE POLITICS OF OLD!!!

Posted by: Marcus, Dallas TX | March 7, 2008, 10:55 am 10:55 am

The rules are the rules”? Howard Dean says. I thought the ultimate rule was that each U.S. citizen’s vote would count and that could not be taken away from us???? In fact isn’t that a right of ours??? Howard Dean is taking my MIchigan vote away from me as to who could be president of this country – because of some timing issue of which states should go first???? I don’t think the DNC has that authority. The votes should count as cast.

Posted by: this election counts | March 7, 2008, 11:07 am 11:07 am

One Simple “YES” People voices should be heard. There should be a re-do. The democracy is all about by the people, for the people and to the people.

Posted by: Lakshmi MD | March 7, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am

Several factors here point to the fissures in our system and the ease that political campaigns have in dividing our nation. The rules were decided by the DNC and agreed upon by all candidates. The fact that Mr. Obama’s name was not even on the Michigan ballot points out the flaw in the Clinton campaign’s logic. Allowing delegates from that state to be seated would justify national revolution. The fact that both state legislatures were controlled by a Republican majority should be evidence enough to tell any free-thinking American that they planned on this. Additionally, it would seem that the Clinton campaign also planned on MI and FL as insurance in case they couldn’t beat out Mr. Obama. Finally, if one looks at the evidence, it is clear that the negative campaigning, the NAFTA lie (as it was the Clinton campaign, NOT the Obama campaign that called Canada), and the fact that Hillary and John McCain seem to be combining forces to take on Obama together all point to the establishment trying to stamp out the fire of liberty that has been lit in this nation by the Obama campaign. Too many new voters have been engaged to allow old establishment politics to get away with a 2000 style political race where elections can be stolen and back room deals will decide the fate of our nation. Move over you old, decrepit, and defeated establishment supporters, there is a new sun on the horizon and a new era is about to dawn; one that is free of Clinton scandals, McCain’s continuing of Bush policy, and the politics reminiscient of the Night of the Long Knives. You are history!

Posted by: Iowa Integrity | March 7, 2008, 11:31 am 11:31 am

Why don’t people realize that it is not people’s fault that the primaries were moved up. The people of FL and MI shouldn’t be penalized for someone else’s fault. Eventhough I am for a re-do if Obama wins in re-do it is very unfair as you all know he is a brain washer!!

Posted by: Lakshmi MD | March 7, 2008, 11:56 am 11:56 am

Why does Florida always screw up elections? Are they dumb, or just cynical? Then their GOP governor is trying to interferes with the Dem.’s primaries, sick! sick! sick! Wake up Democrats!

Posted by: RubaDub | March 7, 2008, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm

Oh, and on your point thats it’s not the people’s fault, lets examine this thought throughly. People elect the politicians that is suppose to represent them, the voted in republican parties of both states moved the election up against the rules, AND most importantly, with the approval of the democratic party heads of state. Therefore, in all actuality, it is indirectly the citizens of the these states that elected these politicians which made this dumb decision. Now, I don’t agree that these voters should be disenfranchised, I think that a real solution should be made, but the election that took place is NOT what should be counted.

Posted by: Marcus, Dallas TX | March 7, 2008, 12:12 pm 12:12 pm

The voters FL & MI should have refrained from participating. They blew it.

Posted by: RubaDub | March 7, 2008, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm

The underhandedness of Obama’s side is to prevent Hillary from getting her winning votes in FL & MI. Who subscribes to dirty politics? Obama. When Obama had more popular votes and losing in delegates he was proclaiming the fair way was to have superdelegates align with their states popular vote choice. Now that he has more delegates and has lost more states in popular votes he is proclaiming the fair determining factor is the number of delegates a candidate has. He is such a flip flopper, double talking, and intelligence insulting person. I know he cannot remember things, but he should realize the public has a better memory than his.

Posted by: this election counts | March 7, 2008, 12:51 pm 12:51 pm

Does anyone know who is responsible for moving the 2 primaries up past the legal date? Are these people hiding somewhere?

Posted by: pt | March 7, 2008, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm

Rubadub===
Why would any registered voter who wanted their voice to be heard not vote?
The people have a right to be counted and the DNC should make that happen. Those that caused this nasty little mess
should be held accountable for their actions then drawn and quartered.

Posted by: TheShadow Knows | March 7, 2008, 1:43 pm 1:43 pm

Commander Guy—
The most fair and cheapest solution in Florida would be for the DNC to certify the standing talley. Both sides were on the ballot. Neither side campaigned, that is fair to the candidates and the voters who participated. Michigan is the fly in the ointment.

Posted by: TheShadow Knows | March 7, 2008, 1:53 pm 1:53 pm

True, Obama knew the rules and he broke them by releasing an ad in Florida which they all agreed not to do. Therefore, since all candidates were on the ballot, the vote counts. Just add a caucus so Obama people don’t feel freaked out or ripped off. It is cheaper and everyone’s vote will count.

Posted by: irma | March 7, 2008, 2:35 pm 2:35 pm

I am much more concerned with BO’s ties to Rezko than how much Hillary and Bill earn.

Posted by: irma | March 7, 2008, 2:37 pm 2:37 pm

WHY DON’T THE CANDIDATES SPLIT THE COST FOR A NEW PRIMARY OR CAUCUS IN MICH. AND FLA. NEITHER OF THEM WANTS TO GET OUT OF THE RACE,BOTH OF THEM HAVE A POINT. BARACK OBAMA WASN’T EVEN ON THE MICH. TICKET,NOR DID HE EVEN CAMPAIGN IN FLA. BECAUSE HE FOLLOWED THE RULES.AND HILLARY CLINTON CAN QUIT HER WHINING BECAUSE SHE DIDN’T GET HER WAY,EVEN THOUGH SHE AGREED TO THE TERMS FROM THE BEGINNING.

Posted by: JANET GLAZIER | March 7, 2008, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm

Obama is no less corrupted than Clinton. He is such a flip flop. But most American adults are not as stupid as his blind followers. Don’t you see he was not able to even utter a complete sentence during debates and interviews? He is only good at public speaking because somebody else write him the speeched.

Posted by: floridain33122 | March 7, 2008, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm

Well whadda ya know… James Carville just offered up $15 million to help pay for primaries in FL and MI. LOL

Posted by: DCVoter | March 7, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm

It’s one thing for Florida’s legislative to ‘ask’ the DNC for some help to cover their screw-up but to demand that they pay for a completely new primary is simple ridiculous. I DO NOT agree that the people of Florida should have to pay for it. But aren’t the republicans that voted for the date change, in office because they are elected by the people of the state? What about the voters who knew their votes were not going to count and never showed up at the polls? And, no campaigning involved? Then there’s Michigan, where you didn’t even have one of the candidates on the ballot. This is fair? No, it absolutely is not. Both states need to take the responsibility of their actions and figure out a solution, without affecting the wallet of their citizens and stop blaming who or why it happened. The point is, that it already has so step up and take some repsonsibility.

Posted by: Mike | March 7, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm

When the Florida and Michigan Democratic Committees decided to adopt their cavalier approaches and move their primaries to dates contrary to the DNC’s instruction, they opened their voters up to being disenfranchised. The people who made these decisions must assume responsibility for the consequences. As a society, we’ve totally lost touch with that reality. I’m an avid Democrat and am not particularly wild about either Obama or Clinton, but there should be no “re-do” election, much less time wasted being concerned over who would pay for it. Florida and Michigan Democrats: rid yourselves of those state level officials that created this mess and disenfrancchised you. Your prediciment is their fault, not the DNC’s.

Posted by: sps91158 | March 7, 2008, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm

If the morons in Florida want to change their primary date in violation of the previously agreed dates that were made with BOTH the DNC and the RNC – and now they want a Re-Do… let them have the re-do and THEY pay for it. Why should I have to pay for their stupidity, vanity and all around greed.
Lets not forget that both the DNC AND the RNC sanctioned the state committees for breaking the agreement.

Posted by: Philip | March 7, 2008, 7:36 pm 7:36 pm

As Obama recently said, “We should let the people’s voices be heard.” Michigan and Florida voters voted when the polls were open. Do not re-vote. Count their votes. If delegates’ votes for other states are counted, then count the Florida and Michigan delegates’ votes! Be fair. Maybe the math favors Obama, but the “people” favor Hillary! This is a democracy—not an Algebra Test.

Posted by: PROUDAMERICAN2008 | March 7, 2008, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm

I would definitely support a mail in primary for both states. I think everyone involved ought to divide the costs — the Florida Dems, the DNC and our 2 very rich candidates.
I’d much rather see them use some of their amazing fundraising for a redo (or 1st do) of the swing states of Florida and Michigan than see them use it for more attack ads at each other and their campaign operatives comparing one another to Starr, Bush, Rove, and I assume next, Satan and the Antichrist.

Posted by: Mari Helen | March 7, 2008, 11:15 pm 11:15 pm

i feel they should move on with the election. Let Why should they look back. The people of Flordia will be able to vote in November. Hillary is trying to win unfair. Shwe want to know what is happening in Obama campaign part. Should obama know what is going on in her campaign. Obama can win the presidency. I hope the american people look in to thier heart and let Hillary out of the presidency. She is very mean. I pray for her soul for God to touch her heart and change her attitude. For her to be a formal first lady. She is not being lady like. Is this the kind of person we want for president. When she has to face difficult people for our country. She need to calm down. How are she going to make peace with other countries when they has hostile attidues and she display the same. Our country will be in a mess. The other countries will hate us. Please world get a grip on your conscious. Hillary is not the best canidate for this country. We need a person like Obama who will be able to make peace not war. She is very rude and has a dispostion that is not pleasing in the sight of God. One nation under God, Hillary is not showing that in her political career.I hope the world will open up their eyes. I pray hard for Obama and his campaign.

Posted by: Wanda | March 7, 2008, 11:43 pm 11:43 pm

“Everyone involved”? How does the rule makers (DNC) and candidates count as being involved? If a criminal breaks the law and is fined, do we have the judge, and both attorney’s pay the fines while the law-breaker walks free? Saying that idiotic idea was true, then how do we determine exactly how much to charge the candidates? Do you split it in half and force the money that they both fairly generated throughout this campaign to pay for their own votes? Well hell, we might as well invite Romney back into the game then. The one thing that is clear is that whoever it is that becomes the next President needs to make their “from day one” initial start by teaching the state of Florida on how to hold an election once and for all.

Posted by: Mike | March 7, 2008, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm

Reverse example of how Obama plagiarism:
Attention all True democrats,
No need to rally to Obama’s Defense! He is the only true loser in this race! We have all seen Obama praising McCain on the news! Obama is a Socialist! He doesn’t care if he wins or not as long as Hillary doesn’t! Obama does not deserve to win the Democratic nomination, because he is a Socialist! Vote for Hillary Clinton. She is the only qualified candidate with good judgment running for President of the United States.

Posted by: Change | March 8, 2008, 10:45 am 10:45 am

What does the DNC have against Florida? Seems like they get mad at Florida in every election. Maybe they just don’t like old people or maybe it’s because the Democrats can’t take the heat. (LOL). The Democratic Party seems to have written Florida off. Maybe Florida should respond in a like manner.

Posted by: jijalagi | March 8, 2008, 12:21 pm 12:21 pm

flordia has had their primary election. they should not be allowed another. one is enough.

Posted by: kemo hall | March 8, 2008, 5:19 pm 5:19 pm

There is no reason whatsoever to have a redo in Florida. Both Clinton and Obama were on the ballot. I can’t believe this is even an issue. I heard the Obama people actually are saying Clinton has more name recognition in Florida so it’s unfair to Obama because he didn’t campaign there to try and improve his chances. Give me a break, King Obamas name has been shoved down our throats for over a year now-every radio, tv station newspaper in the world knows about this guy. I was in South America in Feb and even the people there had heard of him. Even if the did the primaries in Mich and Florida over again, Obama wouldn’t win. The delegates in Florida should be divided according to the Jan primary and Mich should give Obama the 40% unsure votes. Obama, Grow- up and quit wasting our time with this nonsense.

Posted by: ben | March 10, 2008, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.