DNC Panel to Weigh Florida and Michigan Challenges

It would be costly- but Florida and Michigan just need a re-vote. With both names on the ballot and every resident knowing their vote will be counted. That’s the only fair way. None of this splitting the votes 50/50 garbage.

They knowngly broke the rules… just like a democrat to refuse to play and sue for half of the purse, after the fact. They made their bed, hell with them. If they don’t care about the integrity of their votes, why should they be bailed out from their own mess. They, and no one else chose to make their voice irrelivant. End of story.

HATE TO RAIN ON THE OBAMA CORONATION PARADE BUT…ya’all wanted to play by the rules SO LET’S…
Rule 11.A. of the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention states the following:
11. TIMING OF THE DELEGATE SELECTION PROCESS
A. No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention. Provided, however, that the Iowa precinct caucuses may be held no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the Nevada first-tier caucuses may be held no earlier than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the New Hampshire primary may be held no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February; and that the South Carolina primary may be held no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February. In no instance may a state which scheduled delegate selection procedures on or between the first Tuesday in February and the second Tuesday in June 1984 move out of compliance with the provisions of this rule.
++ BUT HERE IS THE KICKER ++
We already know that Florida and Michigan violated Rule 11.A. by moving their primaries to a date before the first Tuesday in February. There is no argument there, but what about Iowa, New Hampshire, and yes, South Carolina too.

So far, Obama has successfully blocked any recount efforts. I’m sure he’ll continue to do so. The DNC committee will do NOTHING to alienate the black voters.

what happened to Howard Dean’s 50-State Strategy?????? He is full of B.S. if he won’t count the Florida and michigan votes….specially Florida because, it was the GOP controlled Legislature who advanced the primary date…..Yeahhhhhhhh!!!!!

Why is this committee meeting so late in the game? I am concerned that they have no intention of doing anything about their flawed decision. Meeting so late in May 31 will only exonorate them from condemnation of voters so they may think. I am quiting this spinless and confused party if Fl votes are not counted. You do not loose important state that you need to win the general election and still hope to win anything. Wisconsin, Virginia and MN are not reliable Dem states as Obama has showcased them. Wining bunch of red states and caucuses is like building a pie in the sky, It is a sham, empty argument and lunacy that Obama’s red states will be there for him in November. Let’s get real, the man is not ready.

Here’s a solution:
Hold a revote in MI, seat the FL delegates according to vote count in the original vote.
The FL vote was fair. Both Hillary and Obama were on the Ballot. In any case, it was the Republicans who moved up the primary. Why should Florida democrats be punished?
Unfortunately, Obama has already blocked a revote in MI once, because he thinks he will lose. The DNC should overrule him for the sake of party unity. and so that there will be a clear, undisputed victor.
Its that easy. I’m sure the DNC will screw it up.

Florida and Michigan 2.3 million voters overturned the myopic rule of DNC . none of the candidates campaign there. So the vote should be counted as it is. Unles DNC working for McCain .

Any candidate who left their name on a Michigan or Florida ballot as a Democratic party nominee for President, actually or impliedly violated the Rules and spirit of the Rules of the Party.
They campaigned! Putting and leaving a name on the ballot is an act of campaigning.

“Make Every Vote Count”
“Make Every Vote Count”
“Make Every Vote Count”
As a Democrat – that’s our battlecry, right???

That is a very valid if other state violated the rules why only penalize FL /MI?
This alone has made the DNC stance weak you cant dish out penalties for one section and leave out others. Dean should of thought of that before he wanted to try and play hardball with the FL legislature for going ahead with their election.
The election was sanctioned and ratified by the FL legislature that is the official body for the elections, the votes has to count to do other wise will be taking away the rights of the people that voted.

Everybody knows if the positions were reversed, Obama would be more than happy to have revotes in Michigan and Florida.
He is a politician and a very sleazy one at that.
We Democrats should consider who can win in November and increasingly, that person is Hillary Clinton.
Does anybody REALLY believe that disenfranchising Michigan and Florida will not hurt Obama?
His supporters need to GET REAL.

He should drop out but that will never happen.

Just for thoughts. From what I can tell, the only person(s) who are complaining about Florida and Michigan is Clinton and her camp. If the people of those states were really upset then why haven’t they spoken up.
The real reason behind the controversey has more to do with the fact that Hillary Clinton has been placing herself “strategically” to take the place as the first female president since her days in college in the 70′s then about the will of the voters. If she were concerned about that then she would be calling for a revote only because Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan.
Yes, I am not a Clinton supporter but I have my reasons and there are many. I just feel that someone who has been wanting a job for over 25 years, has endured world-wide humiliation with the antics of her husband, and has embelished her own past for political gains should not have be trusted to become the most powerful person in the world.
By the way, the President is key in the creation of the fiscal budget each year. Why would we even consider electing someone who is 10 million in debt and has only 9 million in cash and feels that her campaign will “revue the past due bills and decide later when it is an appropriate time to pay them”. Wonder if my mortgage and utility holders would allow my to do the same.
And she accused Obama of being “out of touch”?!

The Rules are the Rules. Everybody voted in favor of the Rules in advance. Hillary has even said the Michigan vote did not count.
If you are from MI go vote against the politicians who engaged in this scofflawism. Better Yet, Impeach the Governor.
But to paraphrase Bill: “If only we could change the rules after the fact to Hillary’s advantage….. She’d be way ahead.”
Deal with reality.

And to quote a Superdelegate that matters…….
No voters will be left behind.
Donna Brazile
She needs to pony up on that promise.

Jim Cranford,
Hillary’s campaign is not in debt, It had unpaid bills and was at risk of not having the money to pay them… Bu8t that those bills did get paid… And being that this countryis 9 trillion in debt due to Bush, I think that someone that is able to over come debt and end up with money to boot nis exactly what we need to pull out of the debt created by Bush… Obama dont know what hard times are, but lets look at the real questions on money… Hillary and Obama are pretty even when it comes to supporters and votes…But Hillary yet the Hillary supporters are all tapped out. But Obama has out spent her in every race to date and he still has 42 million. and his supporters bare not tapped out. Seems funny that he is talking about Hillary taking tanted money, But he is the one setting records for rasing the most and he wants you to think that it is all from online donations at $200.00 or less… The numbers dont add up… But he wants to talk about Hillary and oil company money, When he is that one setting records on moneys raised from executives that work for those oil companies… then to make matters worse he voted to give those oil companies a 6 billion dollar subsidies, I guess we could say that a large chunk of that 42 mil. was is quite a nice thank you gift form all those under paid oil tycons that still have a job, while we cant afford gas in our cars to get to ours…

VICKIE
I AGREE WITH YOU 1000%
HE CLAIMS THINGS WHEN THEY WORK FOR HIM
NOTICE HOW HE DID EVERYTHING IN HIS POWER NOT TO GET MI VOICES HEARD BUT I BET YOU, HE WILL BE THE FIRST IN LINE TO CLAIM SOME OF THOSE VOTES. WHAT IS SAD IS PEOPLE IN OTHER STATES KNOW THIS AND THEY STILL SUPPORT HIM BECAUSE HE “INSPIRES” THEM. (SMOKE SCREENS AND BULL)

Where in the rules does it say the winining margin must exlude these delegates?
oh, and FL and MI were stripped of delegates because of the will of Dean and his cronies. There is no explicit rule for doing that.

Michigan and Florida should be counted. Otherwise, it’s no different than doing what we complain about is happening in the middle east. It’s oppression, where is the freedom of rights? Where has democracy gone? What is going on?
Since Obama has entered this campaign, I’ve seen division, intimidation, lies, bullying, threats. He talks about unity and change, but the only change I have seen is for the worse, and unity has given way to division. America needs to stand and come together to make certain the right thing is done. We can’t let Obama do this. In order to get what he wants, he is dividing the nation. He’s done nothing but lie about his shady associations, NAFTA, his Rezko connection and ties to other terrorists or extremists. He’s attended a church for 20 years that spreads hate propoganda and he’s made his campaign about race and cries foul whenever he has to be accountable. And this is a guy who’s trying to prevent people in Florida and Michigan from voting.
What would he do to the country if elected if this is what he’s doing now? Isn’t it a frightening thought?

Votes count. Thomas Jefferson is knocking his grave to come back to life to teach these “Democrats” something about the principles of one-person-one-vote. When all votes are included, HRC wins.

Arwa: Thanks for standing by us! You know even our governor Granholm has strongly advocated a fair revote! But our baby revote proposal was “fixed” by the O Camp as we were moving close- on one of those days when we were hopeful.

In a recent survey, FL was polled and 54% for Clinton and 34% Obama this month, seems similar to vote results on election day WHICH IS STILL NOT 50/50 between the 2 candidates. I have many friends in FL who said that is the same as not counting (0/0)because the candidates are not desired equally by the voters, 50/50 is UNFAIR

Unless the delegates from Florida and Michigan are seated AS THEY WERE VOTED UPON, the whole primary becomes illegitimate and likely illegal. I have resigned from the Democratic Party, partly because of this issue. Howard Dean is a BUffoon and is not fit to run a carwash, let alone the DNC. Ima 56 and ashamed to have called myself a Democrat.

In my opinion, it is a constitutional right of a citizen of the United States to be allowed to cast a vote in the electing of a President of the United States. Since these two states have officially validated the primaries as being legal, there is no option but to count the votes as cast.
The DNC also made the rule that the Supers are INDEPENDENT TO VOTE HOWEVER THEY PLEASE and that’s what the DNC should be spouting, not the leader’s opinions.
In 2000 the Democratic Party screamed “count every vote” and now in 2008 they basically say let’s just shut out 2 entire states of our union.
The Democratic Party will lose many, many Democrats over this and more importantly will cost the Democratic Party the Presidency; and, they have no one to blame but themselves. There is quite a bit of empathy in other unaffected states that will make a statement come November!
Unfortunately, we cannot unring the bell. The votes were cast and can’t be altered.

You cannot arbitrarily steal the vote from states, particularly when you gave 4 other states the go-ahead, and then hope those states support your party in the General Election. This is not about rules that can be interpreted and enforced according to one’s ego; this is about WINNING the General Election. Attempts to manage the outcome of this process hints at bias for a candidate rather than for your party. If you are loyal to the Party, then you want it to win.

Re-vote, Re-vote, Re-vote!
Splitting the delegates 50-50 is the same as not counting the votes.

Michigan & Florida are ESSENTIAL to a general election victory. If the DNC insists upon ignoring MI & FL then these states will ignore the DNC in November.
Why is Obama scared of acknowledging these voters? The Michigan re-vote was paid for but Obama’s legal team blocked it… hmm- I wonder why?

I cannot see any way around counting the votes of FL and MI. The Democrats are going to need those two states to ensure we recapture the White House in November. Stripping those two states of their votes is nothing short of suicide for the Democratic party. The DNC needs to seat those delegates. Or they need to strip the other states that held early primaries/caucus’ of their delegates as well. Fair is fair and the DNC does not get to pick and choose about who to punish in this situation. It’s all or none. Of course, since the DNC is shoving Obama down our throats I doubt they want to do either one.
And there can be no argument as to how the votes are split in MI and FL. Obama and Edwards both decided to remove their names from the MI ballot – that was their choice and they did it for their own reasons. Sen. Clinton won the state and that’s that.
Obama DID campaign in FL via commercials for a two week period against party rules. So, the vote should stand as is and the delegates seated based on that vote.
Believe me, Obama does NOT want to tangle with voters from either of these states in November if he gets the nomination.
Disenfranchising them now is a sure bet on getting Sen. McCain elected. Democratic voters will jump party lines and vote for McCain – no doubt about it and anyone who thinks differently is a fool.
And here’s a little something for the DNC to think about….there’s a large population of Democratic voters that will NOT vote for Sen. Obama should he get the Dem. nomination. All the pundits think we will but I’ve got news for them – it will NEVER happen. We’ll jump over and slam McCain in the White House so fast it will make Obama’s and the DNC’s head(s) spin.
Don’t think so? Watch us and watch the
White House go to the Republicans for another 8 years. Go ahead, put the Kool-Aid Kid on the ballot.

I would like to give a big SHOUT OUT to Howard Dean and the DNC for their coup of the Democratic Party.

Obama’s argument for not debating is that the folks across the country have seen enough debates to make an informed decision.
That should then apply to Florida (where he did campaign) and Michigan. Right?

The millions of people that voted didn’t break the rules. It is also in the rules that the states can revote if the candadites agree. Obama thinks his “rights” are more important then the rights of millions of other American’s.
I believe that is the way Obama would run his presidency. What is good for Obama is the way to go.

People came out in FL and MI and voted for their candidate of choice because they wanted to. That is very impressive.

attention mr dean and pelosi:
Democracy is alive, she has risen. Now we need to give her voice. And then we will march with her all the way to the convention. We are ready to set the record straight-you can no longer buy an election. you cannot steal an election. we will hold your feet to the fire. we will not have another presidential installation, we the people will not allow it. you fat cats got away with it once and look at the mess we are in. if we want to regain our status in the world, if we want our children to proudly salute the flag, we must do better. the time is now.

I beg to differ with Jim about Hillary being the only one interested in MI and FL being counted. Seems the Dem population of those states have a little interest in the matter as well. Anyone with gray matter knew that in MI if they voted uncommitted, the vote was for Obitter or Edwards. Let your guy have all the uncommitted there – that’s more than he would have gotten had his name been on the ballot. As for FL, there has been much confirmation that Mr. hopeandchange did plenty of campaigning there. He’s real interested in sticking with the rules, isn’t he, unless he benefits more from not doing so.
Really, no thinking person believes it’s fair or ethical to discount these votes. Even the Obama babies would think so if they were actually mature enough to understand the whole nominee selection process.

We still live in a Democracy so every vote should count!
Otherwise, rename yourself as the UNDEMOCRATIC Party.
Dean can step down regardless, for making the DNP loose any credibility left.
He should know that the Obama finger flip was far worse than his hoarse shout. That itself ought to disqualify Obama.
DNC, DNP party leaders and members, Please count the people’s vote. If you leave FL and MI now, you can leave out other states next time. Your arguments on why you are leaving them out no longer hold water. We are living in an information age and we know your secrets.
Refuse to be blackmailed. Anyone can trash you from any direction. Having underground connections can give someone lots of power. But you need to rise above the muck and show that you care about DEMOCRACY!
Leave the history of why you sanctioned behind… because it no longer matters. Why? Here’s why: You could have given BOTH the states the opportunity to re-vote. You failed to do that (reason does not matter). The DNP failed to give them a second chance to voice their selection. So, it is incumbent upon the DNP to honor their initial voice. So, now, you must BOTH count their votes AND seat the 100% of the delegates. This is the ONLY way to give the voters their full right to be heard as originally intended in the primary.
If you dont give them full voice, you will loose in November.
All immigrants who came to the US legally and settled here because we thought this is democracy and took citizenship in this country because this is our preferred democracy are watching this very closely. Many of us are very sickened by what has happened. We feel that if this can be done in one state, it can be done elsewhere and it is no different from tampering with the ballot box.
We have also watched the tampering with caucuses that Obama’s staffers have done in San Antonio TX and several other earlier caucuses. Quite sickening.
Why is the media in this country not honoring journalism basics and reporting these facts that threaten democracy in the US? Is there any system to balance and preserve democracy?
It appears that democracy is seriously at risk… I am truly concerned.
DNP – you must uphold democracy, above all other rules, squabbles, hysteria, and persona. This is way too important.

I noticed only a couple of posters are actually stating facts, so I thought I would add them or support those posted:
1) Per the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, the DNC did not treat all states that moved up their primaries equally (MI and FL ere the only ones punished and others were not). The substantive argument of voter rights being violated under the eual protection clause of the constitution was affirmed as having merit by the Circuit Court and the district court was ordered to vacate their ruling on the FL case. The plaintiff had filed the case before he voted and therefore was instructed to refile the case again. The plantiff stated he intends to refile to fight for the rights of FL voters.
2) While some voters may have stayed home because of the prior DNC ruling, others crossed over to try to cheat in the Republican primary and would not have been allowed to participate in the revote in MI (this was Obama’s reasoning for blocking it). It appears he wants to votes of those who cheated (not very becoming of a Presidential candidate). In any case, both MI and FL had record turnouts in the democratic primaries and the elections were certified.
3) When Obama learned FL law prevented him from removing his name from the ballot, he opted to make a national ad buy and his motives were suspect since that costs much more than a regional buy to target SC voters (his reasoning for the buy). Only Obama himself and his campaign folks really know whether he himself cheated by knowingly running campaign ads that aired in FL. His DNC buddies told him it was ok. Why is this suspect? Because Dean is well-known for his criticism of the Clintons since his 2004 nomination loss.
4) Clinton had never insisted that she be awarded all the votes in MI. She offered Obama 40% (the undecided) which was more than fair and actually to her disadvantage. The undecided vote represented the voters who supported Biden, Richardson, Edwards, and Obama. All other dem candidates were on the ballot – not just Clinton.
5) The only agreement the candidates signed was to not campaign in those states. Clinton did not campaign in those states. Both Obama and Clinton held private fundraisers as scheduled in those states which were allowed by the rules because those are not considered campaigning. Running ads is campaigning and Obama did that with the blessing of the DNC. When the Clinton surrogates heard this they urged Clinton to do the same since Obama had violated the rules already they considered all bets were off. However, Clinton held true to her commitment and did not run ads.
6) The bylaws committee meets on May 31 to hear the appeals from MI and FL states. There has already been talk of counting FL “as is” with 1/2 delegate allocation like the RNC did and doing the same with MI with Obama being awarded the 40% Clinton offered.
The above are the facts. I personally disagree with what has been proposed because the voters should never have been punished for the acts of party officials and the republican controlled legislatures who very obviously intended to disrupt the dem process to their advantage in Nov.
Please notice that what is being proposed does not punish the SD’s in MI but instead punishes the voters. The DNC needs to punish the right people based on the facts:
The FL dem party asked for an allowable date. The FL republican controlled legislature refused and moved the primary date up knowing it would result in action by the DNC against FL dem voters. This primary should stand as is and no punishment should be administered.
The MI dem party moved their date up in defiance of the DNC with full knowledge of the consequences and had the blessing of a reublican controlled senate in MI of course. The MI SD’s should be punished and not seated at the DNCC. The pledged delegates based on the vote count for Clinton should be awarded and seated as is and the undecided vote should be apportioned logically to allocate and seat pledged delegates for Obama.
In the longer run, after the GE is over, IMHO the DNC should: eliminate caucuses and make them all primaries by secret ballot; eliminate SD participation until the convention via a special provision for party decision-making in the event a nominee cannot run in the GE because of legal or health problems or similar circumstances that would be detremental to the country; revamp delegate allocation to match electoral allocation (all or nothing); bring in election experts to school the DNC and the respective chapters and state parties on how to efficiently and legitimately conduct an election; and add positions for election experts and pollsters to provide official administration and measurement of ongoing elections.

One more fact I forgot to add: Per the current DNC rules (since 1982), pledged delegates are not bound to the electorate. Most will cast their vote at the DNCC based on the electorate. A small number always change and usually this does not matter. However, in a tight race as we have this year, it does matter. If the race gets down to 2% different in delegates, only 41 would need to change their vote to tip the nomination. There are 300+ SD’s uncommitted which can override this as well. All of the SD’s who have committed to Obama or Clinton are actually causing more trouble and should have been silent so that voters can cast their votes without being influenced.

One of the most irritating things of the Bush administration has been an unrelenting disdain for facts. A conclusion is reached in one’s mind on the desired outcome and then the facts distorted to achieve the outcome. So, with that in mind:
1. Michigan doesn’t count. Sorry, everybody agreed to it. We all knew it here. If you don’t like it, then go back in time and change things (and kill Hitler too while you’re at it). There is no fair way to revote Michigan, nor should it occur. Rules without sanctions elicits anarchy. If you don’t like the current results of the primaries/caucuses, I suggest you petition your own state to revote its election.
2. The nominees are selected, not elected. Just like the President. No, it’s not democratic and it shouldn’t be. Passions can be too great in democracies and prevent accomplishment of anything. That’s why the founding fathers made the Constitution the way it is. (Again, if you don’t like it, then it’s time to revisit your time machine.)
3. Presidents, in general, are inexperienced at the job. Senators usually don’t win. Why? Maybe because everybody hates Congress, but I don’t know.
4. It is reasonable to assume that Senator Clinton would have won Florida in a contested election as the demographics favor her there as they did in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
So, yes, I think everybody wants their candidate to win and wants every possible advantage. However, denial of the facts or revising history is better left to Bush/Cheney.

@DCVoter:
Having read your posts for some time, it is clear you are quite thoughtful. However, your ‘contacts’ here seem to be anecdotal. Everyone here was well aware the election on the democratic side was a non-starter. Greg in MI is absolutely correct that it is clear our governor was vying for a political appointment in the Clinton administration.

I would like to know what Hillary said about the DNC’s decision/ruling back in August 2007 concerning Florida and Michigan choice to move their primary. Was she so outraged at that time that the possibility existed that voters were at risk of being disenfranchised? Was she so sure of her campaign back in August, that those votes would not matter?(and noe they do?) Why didn’t she remove her name from the Michigan ballot?

To MIguy: (from another MIguy and a Democrat ;-)
I have to agree with DCvoter on his point.
Obama’s proxies loudly, repeatedly proclaimed – on the public airwaves (and in private) to vote for “uncommitted”.
Anyone who followed the news and who went into the voting booth in MI understood that a vote for Clinton=Clinton, a vote for uncommitted=Obama (or anyone but Hillary).
It is true that none of us knew if any or our votes would count in the end. But we voted for our preferred candidates “just in case”.

RPetrie – look at the data if you want to know… there were four candidate names on the ballot plus undecided – not just Clinton. Regarding your other question, both Clinton and Obama stated last year that they expected the FL and MI delegates to be seated at the DNCC by request of the nominee. Clinton specifically stated that if she is the nominee she would ask her delegates to also request the FL and MI delegates to be seated. It has always been a contention by all senior democrats that the delegates would eventually be seated. The decision was not made by Dean (he has no power to do that). The committee made a stupid egotistical decision without all the facts. All of the candidates agreed to abide by that decision because they all need the support of the idiots in the DNC party. Non-party affiliated candidates (independents) have never garnered more than 4% of the electorate in a general election for President. Hence, what you are inferring is ludicrous because both the remaining candidates had the exact same position last year. The only one that changed was Obama when he blocked the revote effort in MI and refused to accept the FL results as is.

MIGuy – Edwards and Obama CHOSE to remove their names from the ballots. That is not an irregularity in an election process. Some say Obama did it to make Iowa voters feel more important or to pander to the liberals in control of the DNC. I say it doesnt matter why he did it – the fact is, he removed his name so he has only himself to blame. As another poster pointed out, he made sure his campaign and surrogates encouraged voters to cast their vote undecided to vote AGAINST Clinton. So in that sense, 40% for Obama is an extremely generous allocation for MI delegates.

It doesn’t matter what Hillary did or didn’t do or Obama or Michigan’s politicians…it doesn’t matter what anyone’s strategy is or was.
The only thing that matters is that the DNC doesn’t have the right to create a punishment equal to the same punishment that’s handed out only to convicted felons! Good Lord!!

@DCVoter:
My apologies, but with due respect, it is hard to extrapolate a family estate from ‘contacts’. My assumption was based on that I have never seen you mention this in your previous posts (which we have discussed in the late evening on many other nights).
@JWF: No offense taken – it’s hard to always be cordial on these blogs and I typically assume other posters are well-meaning. I hope they assume the same of me.

MIguy – apology accepted although i did include the words (family included) in my original post but perhaps you missed it. As I have stated before, I have and international family in many states. MI and TX are the strongest ones for me but there are other states that I have family in as well. Contacts IMHO include family, friends, and business associates I communicate with on a weekly or daily basis.

@DCVoter: I was much more aware of the TX connection as you had mentioned living there previously (or at least this is what I recall). I will add the new information to your dossier.

@JWF: Agreed – interesting article. I don’t follow the numbers close enough to know if the math works out, but it would be interesting if they can be verified. Thanks for the link.

@s alderdice:
Interesting link. But if you look at the cross tabulations it appears that even among those who thought the primaries were fair, 45% thought they should not be used to apportion delegates.

LOL about the impersonator. I have seen several posters impersonated by Obama supporters or republicans stirring the pot. My support for Clinton as the best candidate has never changed. The only way I could support Obama in the GE is if FL and MI voters are not disenfranchised. I am an American first and I believe in democratic elections.

@DCVoter: Absolutely agree – superdelegates are entitled to their own opinion. You’ve stated repeatedly, and correctly, to this effect. I don’t follow the numbers close enough, but with each primary my understanding is that Senator Clinton requires more and more of the remaining delegates (super or otherwise) to win. But ultimately it is up to the Democratic party to select their candidate.
I think Senator Clinton is in a difficult position currently. If she wins the nomination, she absolutely needs to win the general election or she risks becoming a pariah. If she loses the nomination, and Obama loses the election, it seems there are already a long line of folks who are lining up to blame her for his loss.

MIguy – I follow and crunch the numbers myself on a running spreadsheet I keep (I get my numbers from the respective SOS official election results not the MSM). The MSM and campaigns skew public opinion with numbers like percentages needed etc. The key numbers to watch are actually the percentage difference in delegates and the percentage difference in the popular vote. Both of those percentages are getting smaller meaning the race is tightening as predicted. The way to calculate them is simpler than the media implies. votes for a candidate * 100/total votes = % for a candidate. The differences between those percentages is the candidate lead. The same formula applies for delegates.
For the popular vote (which only means something to SD’s), not including MI and FL, there is a 1.7% difference in favor of Obama. If we include FL and MI, there is a 1% difference in favor of Clinton. Either way it is a tie because the percent difference is less than the margin of error in the vote tally. This means neither candidate has an effective lead in the popular vote. However, with the projections for the upcoming races, this may change. This is why the SD’s are worried they will have to actually do their job for a change which can harm them politically.
As for the delegate difference, I believe it is close to 3% but I have not calculated the current difference yet myself. What is screwy on that is the MSM is projecting delegates differently for different candidates. The only site that is keeping the actual allocation (since all delegates are not actually allocated until the last state convention on June 29) is the NYT. This is really confusing for voters who are trying to follow and understand the math. It is actually very simple but being misrepresented by the MSM playing with the numbers. End result right now? 1/3 of the uncommitted SD’s could tip the nomination or less than 100 of the pledged delegates changing camps at the DNCC. This is why when Obama was behind before SuperTuesday he stated “if I can get within 100 delegates of Clinton, I have a chance to win”. He knows the reverse is true for Clinton as well. His supporters like Leahy also know it and are concerned enough to call for her to step down to prevent a loss or prevent the SD’s from being forced to do their job at a risk to their political careers. Bill Clinton is right – SD’s agreed to make the tough decisions when they were appointed and should do so. Let all the voters participate first.

Agree with Mark, only way to clear this up is to re-vote. Too much back room rulings will only make things worse for supporters of either campaign. One sure way to fumble the ball is to do more to give reasons for voters of FL and MI to vote Republican. McCain must be loving the free ride. Rush is having a ball watching the dems meltdown.

Do we really have to have the name calling? Everyone has their favorite. Everyone’s favorite has flaws.
bottomline is all 50 states are supposed to be counted.
All people deserve to vote. all people deserve to have their vote counted.
Not everyone is going to be happy.
FL and MI voters had a primary and they voted how THEY wanted. The higher ups who made the mistakes, apparently to do with the republicans, are the ones that caused the problem in Fl especially. But the people should not be punished.
Someone above gave all the rules earlier. If you want to go a step further into their rules. since Obama campaigned, even if nationally, he should have realized nationally included fL; therefore, he broke the rules. And according to DNC rules, anyone who campaigns there when told not to loses all delegates.
So, we just need to sit back and see what their decision is going to be cause we have no control over…obviously.

The time to challenge the rules of the game is BEFORE the game is played not AFTER. If the Clintons and their supporters were so outraged by the fact that the delegates from Florida and Michigan would not be seated, why did they agree to it, and if they had objections why didn’t they raise them BEFORE the voting began? That answer is obvious; they didn’t think it would make any difference because they believed they had the nomination all sewn up. The fact that they want to change the rules now should offend every American’s sense of fair play.

Going by the “Rules” is taught to us when we were young to be part of a disciplined society when we grow up, Please don’t send a message to our young that if things don’t go the way they want then change the rules. Mich and Fla were told not to hold early primary, Those states thought that Hillary was going sweep the country to be the Presidential Democratic nominee and they were wron, Just live with it !

One correction to my post, the People of Michigan never voted to have the primary date moved, it was decided by the State DNC party. I am a life long democrat who right now will be voting independant in the future.

Why is it the media and some who are posting don’t post the truth that Hillary did warn the DNC that is was not good to tell MI goodbye, and what they were doing with these states were going to come back to haunt them in the long run.
This is what she said back then why she did not take here name of the ballot.
“I did not believe it was fair to just say, ‘Goodbye Michigan’ and not take into account the fact we’re going to have to win Michigan if we’re going to be in the White House in January 2009…. I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008…. If you look at some of the states we have to win, the margins have been narrow. And it wasn’t, in my view, meaningful, but I’m not going to say there’s an absolute, total ignoring of the people in all these other states that won’t come back to haunt us if we’re not careful about it.”
There is also no stipulation that any candidate had to take their names off the ballots, it was their choice to do as they wanted Hillary was not the only candidate on the democrat side that left her name on there so stop acting as if she was the only one to do so.

I am a Michigan voter and will be the first person to tell you that the Michigan Primary results should not count. I was one of the ones who actually did vote. I live in a county thats falls right behind Wayne County (Detroit) in the percentage of Democratic voters, and my polling place was deserted the night of the primary. Compare that with most other states which had record breadking turnout. Florida deserves to be argued about, but there is no way the Michigan vote should be considered representative of the state.

Leaving out MI. an FL is the only way Obama could win .

Bottom line: The VOTERS of those states didn’t break any rules, they went out and voted when they were supposed to, taking their right to vote seriously. For those who stayed home, that was their problem,they just didn’t care enough to at least state their choice. The votes were legally counted and certified. Michigan voters were ACTIVELY encouraged to vote uncommitted if they didn’t like Clinton,so I am tired of hearing how unfair it would be to Obama to count them. But then, he is the kind to say things are unfair to him, especially after Charlie and George were mean to him. Obama also managed to sneak in a few national campaign ads in FL, so he actually had an advantage there too. He ran his own strategy there just in case, but now he whines about breaking the rules and being fair since it wouldn’t be to his advantage. Again, double standards from the Obama campaign. If they didn’t count the vote in my state, and I don’t mean split it which would be totally useless, I would not vote at all or vote Republican in November. Sen. Obama simply is not ready to be President, he whines too much about playing fair and simply doesn’t know what he is talking about without copying Clinton’s answers and plans. He should have been an art professor or something where he could criticize others, but stay above the fray himself.

Hillary and Obama signed an agreement not to compaign in FL and MI and they knew the votes in those states would not count in this election. HRC doesn’t have a legal leg to stand own. I live in Florida. I did not vote because we knew that our votes would not be counted. People only went to the polls because there was a property tax issue on the ballot. That’s the only reason people voted. No one in FL was focusing on the election. If FL goes back to the polls, OBAMA will win!!

I think it’s really funny how for almost two months now everyone is so concerned about our ‘votes’ here in Michigan. Well, thanks everyone, that’s awfully considerate. I wonder how many of you actually drive a Ford, GM, or Chrysler car – that would help us more. It’s almost cherry season, how about going out and buying some in the next couple months?
I do believe some of you actually care about us here and not just because it helps your candidate. However, the ruckus and commotion over this is largely not coming from citizens here. I think many, if not most, of us here care more about the recession than delegate apportionment. Perhaps when you all taste the recession we have, you’ll find something more useful to argue about. In the meantime, please mind your own business and leave our dirty laundry to ourselves.

Not in the United State of America that Voters could be Disenfranchise. It’s there Constitutional Rights to be heard period.
1. Yes, Senator was not in the ballot in Michigan but they were campaigning against Senator Hillary Clinton by encouraging voters TO VOTE UNCOMMITED. But she still won.
2. Senator Obama have an opportunity to have the re-do vote they didn’t do anything for they know they won’t win.
3. It’s all against all odds with Senator Hillary Clinton but she keeps on winning the big states.
4. After this fiasco with the DNC once they decided who will be Democratic Candidate they should fire Chairman Howard Dean period.

miguy. one nation under God remember. what state one is from is irelevant to this particular discussion. it is about we the people. it is about democracy. it is about voter right’s. it is about legitimacy. this is not about hillary or obama. i believe that the solution for the situation we are in lies in the ability of the dnc to do their job and count all the votes. then i believe that most of us would support the winner of a fair process. until then we are without a candidate to take on mccain. we do not want another presidential installation or accusations of ‘stealing the election’ which will severely diminish the integrity of the democrats ability to push forth our agenda and focus on the issues, be it hillary or obama. look at how our president today is treated with disdain, animosity, and disrespect. that is precisely the way our candidate would be treated and again nothing would get done. the situation in our country is too serious today-we need somebody that can get the job done and not be challenged on the basis of legitimacy. if you do the math after (counting all the votes) obama could still win and then nobody could challenge your candidate-and yes i for one would then support him. this is about our collective survial.

@sonia trevino:
First, I agree with most of what you wrote. However, you overplay ‘democracy’. This country is not a democracy – and for a good reason if you read all the posts on here. And the Democratic primary is hardly a general election. And “counting” a flawed primary is even worse than democracy – it is a banana republic; it is Iraq under the Ba’ath party.
Honestly, it seems that you are taking this way too seriously. Every candidate will be challenged (even JFK, whom everyone now seems to love, barely beat Nixon). Believe it or not, I do not ascribe the power to the President that you do – the presidential election is not about “our collective survival”. The Congress has much greater power to affect us generally.
And I hold our Congressmen/women and President in very high esteem generally speaking. Who would want to go through this process? God bless them for wanting to help. Now, with that said, I do not hold George Bush in high esteem as he is either a bold-faced liar, an idiot, a pawn, or all of the above.

@ “FOLLOWING THE RULES”:
I am a Michigan citizen who voted in the primary who WOULD like to see a revote. So, not everyone agrees with you their. Don’t say WE went you can really only speak for yourself.
I’m guessing, but when you say WE you actually are speaking for MI votesr who voted “uncommitted” (i.e. Obama or anyone but Clinton).
Of course, you wouldn’t want to have a re-vote. I understand the strategy, but don’t pretend it is a “principled” stance. The DNC rules would and do allow for a re-vote.
@MIguy: nice to see a pincipled Obama supporter is also on the blog;-)

Imposing a rule which prevent the voices of voters to be heard is the act which happens only in the non democracy or communist countries. This kind of party will not survive in the long run. DNC, your dates are number if your leaders don’t change this rule. I think many middle and working class will switch the party if DNC insists to impose this rule. I am one of them.

@ sonia trevino:
Thanks for bringing that up. I’m curious – to all Obama partisans:How DO you account for the fact that – according to Rule 11.A., if MI & FL violated the rules, then so did Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina?
Why are only MI & FL being punished. You chant “Rules, are rules, are rules”. So? Why only MI & FL and not Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina?
I am genuinely curious, maybe there is an argument I have missed.

I too believe that they violated the rules. I say split them 50 – 50. Hillary did not have anything to say about this prior to getting behind in votes in delegates. Obama may have been in the ballot in Florida and Hillary may have also taken Florida however not by the % she won in the illegling voting. She always starts out with a double digit lead because of name recognition however, once Obama starts campaigning in a state the lead is cut down. Oh girl knows that! That why she is trying again to pull a fast one.

The truth of the matter is that in “Florida”, where both Clinton & Obama were BOTH on the ballot, she beat him by 288,167 or 55-33%. Obama did campaign! Count Florida’s votes!
In Michigan, four candidates left their name on the ballot.(Dennis Kuchinich, Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel and Hillary). OBAMA PLANNED THE SCENARIO TO REMOVE HIS NAME BECAUSE HE KNEW HE WOULD LOSE. NOW HE WANTS TO COMPLAIN. OBAMA REMOVED HIS NAME—END OF STORY!
In “Michigan” Hillary received 328,151 votes and uncommitted received 216,043. WHY NOT SPLIT THE UNCOMMITTED BETWEEN THE OTHER 5 CANDIDATES INCLUDING EDWARDS, OBAMA, KUCHINICH, CHRIS DODD, AND MIKE GRAVEL AND CALL IT LIKE IT WAS VOTED!
TOO MANY OBAMA LIES.

This is like dealing with little kids.
“If you keep doing that I’m going to smack you.”
“If you keep doing that I’m going to smack you.”
“If you keep doing that I’m going to smack you.”
BANG!!!
“Why did you do that for?”

Hillary couldn’t beat Obama; she’s been outfundraised, outorganized, outcampaigned, second in delegates, second in popular vote. But let’s throw out the rules that Bill won by because “I’m the one who can beat McCain!” Sure doesn’t look like it to me.

Florida and Michigan were told well before they scheduled their primaries that their delegates would not be seated if they moved them up!! Michigan did the same thing in 2004 and DNC Chairman Terry McAullife punished them for it. Of course, now that he’s Hillary’s hit man, he’s all for seating them. The Clinton campaign signed a pledge in 2007 not to contest or campaign in Florida or Michigan and that their delegates would not be seated.
A LOT of people can’t see the forest for the trees. The Clinton supporters cry about the effect this will have on carrying and Michigan in November. They need to also assess what losing the black vote would do to them in the other 48 states, not only in the presidential election but across the congressional and Senatorial elections, as well!!

“They need to also assess what losing the black vote would do to them in the other 48 states…”
——–
Heck, not just the black vote would be endangered but also the votes of Independents and many others who value integrity and fair play.

What were the Clintons thinking about; when the placed Hillary’s name in the ballot of these two states, These people think they own the party, they can just keep making and remaking the rules as the nomination process proceeds.
Then this dubious Clinton mathematical “Popular Vote Axiom”,She just got to win by all means; Even at the cost of keeping real change 8 years off.
Well now that her chances of winning the pledged dalegates count is over, the so called super dalegates should speak up.

People are confusing state primary elections (set by state legislatures for state and local offices, and state and local referendums abd ballot initiatives) and state political party primaries (set by state political parties – usually to correspond with state primary elections as there is generally no cost to the parties to piggy back on the state parimaries). The DNC (and the RNC) is a PRIVATE organization – it gets to choose how the presidential nominee for the party is chosen. There is no constitutional right for anyone to have a say in how political parties choose their nominee, so any argument that the DNC is violating the constitutional rights of the electorate in Michigan and Florida is very weak. If it wanted, the DNC could have a monkey pull the nominee’s name out of a hat in a bar in Key West as its method of choosing the Dem nominee. It chooses to open the process (as does the RNC) to the voters, provided it’s rules are followed. The state parties in Michigan and Florida knew that if they chose to piggy back their primary on their respective state’s elections, they would have no voice in choosing the Democratic nominee for President. They went ahead with doing so anyway, nowing it was a risk, rather than funding their own, private, primary election, or running caucuses, during the time period such a primary or caucus would be allowed. For that, they lose their delegates. They knew the risk, they rolled the dice, and they came up with snake eyes. Want to blame someone? Blame the state parties in Michigan and Florida.
As for Iowa, NH and SC violating the rules – they did not do so. South Carolina received a waiver from the DNC to mover their primary from 7 days before the 1st Tuesday to 10 days before the 1st Tuesday. No rule broken as the rule was waived.
Neither Iowa or New Hampshire violated the rules either, initial appearances to the contrary. While the rules state that Iowa could not hold their primary more than 22 days before the 1st Tuesday and NH could not hold theirs nore than 14 days before the first Tuesday, the last part of the gives them an out as far as moving their date without penalty. That part of the rule says that “In no instance shall a state which scheduled delegate selection procedures between the first Tuesday in February and the 2nd Tuesday in June 1984 move out of compliance”. Neither Iowa nor New Hampshire scheduled their primaries between those dates in 1984, which means they (and only they) may, without consulting the DNC, move their date out of compliance with the rules. Since they can move their date out of compliance, they did not therefore violate the rules.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case brought by a Florida voter, agreeing with the District Court that he had no standing. While they ordered the District Court to vacate the ruling that the case had no merit, that does not mean the Appeals Court agreed that there was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. They state clearly that it merely raises some interesting questions about whether that applies to primary voting, and the vacation of the no merit ruling simply opens the door for a more thorough evaluation of the claim at a future date – with no guarantee that there will be a finding in favor of the plaintiff on equal protection grounds.

@Russell:
Sorry, I see that you have in fact answered my question.
Still “No rule broken as the rule was waived”, sounds a little weak to someone whose vote won’t be counted (a MI Democrat). In my neck of the country, “what’s good for the Goose is good for the Gander”. The behavior in Iowa or New Hampshire was identical to that of MI, and in the case of FL voters – FL Democrats actually had not say in the matter (the Republican state legistlature moved up the vote).
So, Iowa and New Hampshire get a free pass “because the DNC waived” their bending of the rules, but – oh – MI must be punished, because they went around the DNC?
That still looks like gaming the system to me. The argument is that Obama wins on a technicality? The DNC is playing a roll very similar to that of the (Republican) Supreme court in 2000.
How exactly is that supposed to help the Democratic party win in the General Election?
Obama is the WINNER because of a technicality that permits us to discount two crucial states?
Yeah…Go O..b..a..m.a…..
(dots indicate faint, and diminishing enthusiasm;-)

@Russell:
I have already conceded your argument. A careful reading of the letter of the law disqualifies delegates from MI & FL.
I’m not sure anyone actually contests this. The DNC had the right, within the letter of the law, to disqualify delegates from those states.
If upholding party rules were are only concern, I don’t think there would be a problem. But the “spirit” of the democratic process is violated when a couple of states are allowed to move up their primaries (for legal reasons), but then two states are disqualified for doing the very same thing – moving up their primaries.
In any event, I don’t think there would be a problem if Obama had a commanding lead in the legal delegate count.
But he doesn’t.
This is why somehow counting MI & FL becomes important.
Obama’s supporters argue that he has one the nomination based on his lead in the delegate count. That would be a pretty compelling argument, if all the votes were being counted.
But they aren’t. And curiously, the two states which are being thrown out on a technicality just happen to be two states that favor Clinton.
This leads me to conclude that we honestly, HONESTLY, don’t know which of these two candidates has the most support among Democratic voters.
Maybe Obama should win on a technicality. But, as a MI voter, it will leave a bitter taste.

Obama choose to stay away from MI. That decision was his own choosing and then boycotted a revote. He has no standing to be awarded any delegates.
Florida voters have been disfranchised based on a decision taken by a Republical legislature which they had no way to revoke or contest. Florida voted in droves for Hillary and Fla. is vital for a Nov. win. Give her what she fairly deserve.

Does anybody else realize that the people of Florida did NOT make this decision? The GOP run legislative branch of the Florida government made the change in protical. The Dems tried to stop it, but knowing what havoc it would raise, the GOP, with their GOP leader did it anyhow. Their fate was sealed. Then, when the DNC was approached with a request for an exception, they would not hear it. This waiver was granted in at least three other states, but not here. Actually, the argument was not even heard and fell on the deaf ears of old boys who would rather see Donald Duck go up against McCain than a woman. There was no consideration for the electorate, just power. I can’t speak for what happened in MI, but, if you don’t put your name on the ballot, and your supporters don’t have the good sense to write your name in, then you have more than one problem going in. Count the votes as the “we the people” placed them. For a change of pace, let OUR votes count. Then, and only then, let the chips fall where they may.