The “Disenfranchised” Who Didn’t Vote at All
One talking point we’re hearing a bit more about today has to do with the Democrats in Florida and Michigan who didn’t bother voting in their state primaries because the DNC had told them their votes wouldn’t count.
Would counting the two states’ primaries not affirmatively disenfranchise these voters as surely as not counting the contests would disenfranchise those who did go to the polls?
Gregory P. Nini and Glenn Hurowitz make “a statistical comparison with turnout in other states’ primaries” and conclude that “roughly two million more people would have voted in Florida and Michigan had they expected their delegates to be seated.”
Eric Kleefeld of the liberal muckraking site Talking Points Memo takes a look at these numbers and concludes that “while the Florida primary turnout was high relative to past primaries within the state, the relative Democratic turnout vs. the Republican primary lagged way behind relative party turnout in other primaries and caucuses across the country, where the voting counted from the start. And in Michigan in particular, the voting level there was simply abysmal. This suggests the possibility that far more Democratic voters would have come out in both states if they’d expected the contests to count, meaning that it’s hard to argue that the primaries that actually took place really reflected the will of the people.”
Any Floridians and Michiganers out there with thoughts on the matter?
-jpt
Email
Santorum: Money Will Not Defeat Obama, Ideas Will
Rick Santorum's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
I’m a Michigan college student. I voted uncomitted in the Michigan primary for Obama.
I know alot of people who didn’t vote because we were informed Michigan was stripped of their delegate.
My mother, father, and several distant relatives did not vote. We’re a strong pro-Obama family.
I would like a 50/50 split. 69/59 split is okay I guess. She would net 5 delegate. Not much of a big difference to Obama’s lead.
Posted by: Kim | May 31, 2008, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm
This is why set Fl with some taken away for not following the rules and set Mi for both….People in both states didn’t vote for they were told they would not count and if HIlly was NOT behind right now she would NOT be pushing this mess.
Posted by: charlie | May 31, 2008, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm
I’m loving that the democrats are now looking like the party of disenfrachisement of voters.
Come November, when McCain easily beats Obama, we don’t want to hear the democrats in their usual whiny spin about how the GOP disenfranchised people. It’s always false, and it work this time. Especially since they’re screwing over 2 states.
Posted by: Jo | May 31, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
I am from Florida. I am a clinton supporter and homeowner.
I did NOT vote , but my wife went and voted for Mc Cain because she is a republican.
The fact is, the people who DID go out and vote in spite of the fact they were going to strip the delegates deserves EXTRA consideration.
They demanded their voice be heard more than someone who knew their vote would be counted.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm
KIM i dont understand how you can support someone who ran in 1996 with the blessings of a marxist party,who has consistently associated since high school with marxist antiamericans.who has bent over backward for special interests and coviently had long time lobbyists quit there posistions with the lobbying firms for now so he could claim he is clean when he is not.
Posted by: don tufts | May 31, 2008, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm
Exactly!
The Clintons kept their names on the ballots; then PUBLICLY declare that the elections will not count; and voters of her opponents will stay away.
In this way, the queen Hilary can have it both ways: Use her husband’s NAME RECOGNITION to claim ‘victory’ in Florida and Michigan without having to campaign.
This makes the Clintons deceptive and divisive behavior the more odious.
Clintons weren’t counting on providence. “This is our time”. Americans want change from the old style of divisive and deceptive politics.
And they voted for “Change”!
Posted by: Patriot | May 31, 2008, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm
I am a registered Michigan Democrat. No, I did not vote in January for the following reasons:
1.)The candidate that I support was not on the ballot
2.)Writing in my candidate would have entirely nullified my vote.
3.) Voting for “uncommitted” seemed farcical, since I believe that voting involves declaring WHO you support.
4.) It was the overwhelming opinion of most Michigan Dems that because only one candidate was on the ballot, there would be either a second primary that would count, or, by the end of the primary/caucus season, one candidate would already have a clear majority of elected delegates, and thus, render it unnecessary to re-do the primary. It was believed that the “uncommitted” elected delegates would then support whoever the nominee was.
5.) Dems in MI who support Obama have been frustrated by our state party. Gov. Jennifer Granholm is a huge Hillary supporter because she can’t run for re-election next year due to term limits. Everyone believes that she has been aiming for a job in a Clinton administration, particularly, since both MI senators are Dems and not looking to retire anytime soon.
6.) The other frustrating thing for MI Obama supporters is that Former Gov. Jim Blanchard is also Bill Clinton’s former ambassador to Canada (one of the most sought after ambassadorships for many reasons). It’s well known that he wants to see the Clintons back in the WH in order to land a job – he has not done particularly well since leaving office & Bill’s administration.
Lastly, the unions are quite strong in MI and Edwards would have been their 1st choice. The large blue-collar vote here wants the prosperity of the 1990′s back (which is associated w/Bill) and is suspicious of Obama’s attitudes toward the auto industry. However, the contempt for both Clintons is so palpable in the blue-collar community, that they are likely to vote for McCain regardless of who the Dem nominee ends up being.
Posted by: Killeen | May 31, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
I’m a Michigan resident who was relatively undecided between Clinton and Obama earlier this year. But I very consciously chose NOT to vote in the primary because every side was saying “this thing doesn’t count.”
Hillary’s opportunistic flip-flop — i.e. trying now to somehow count the vote that I was told didn’t count — is what has tipped the scales for me. I now support Obama 100%.
Posted by: Ron | May 31, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
Breaking news, Obama resigns church membership…. oh no.. is he going to a mosque now?
Posted by: gee | May 31, 2008, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm
I am a MI voter who has voted in every primary and every election since I moved to this state 8 years ago. I went to vote at the last minute and was laughed at by all my co-workers, family, and friends for going out of my way to vote “umcommitted” in an election that wouldn’t count. This was not a real primary. Many didn’t even realize there was a primary that day. Secondly, a point that hasn’t been raised at all is based on anecdotal reports that many people torn between Obama and Clinton (the vast majority of us at that time) chose Clinton simply because that was the only choice on the ballot. The “drive” to educate voters to vote uncommitted is really being overstated, I only found out the day before that a write-in would not be counted.
Posted by: Mike | May 31, 2008, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm
I cant find the source for Obama quitting his church.
Anyone have a source? I would like to time stamp it as its the end of Obama as a credible candidate.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
look at CNN now!
Posted by: gee | May 31, 2008, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm
And yet Obama blocked the revote.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm
Florida
all watch the coverage on TV and the debates.
They had a record high of Democratic voter turn out.
Michigan maybe not. But it seems Obama removed his name from Michigan ballot playing games for Iowa.
He does not deserve any delegates from Michigan, if he is playing games with primary election.
Posted by: seah | May 31, 2008, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
I also want to mention that personally I place most of the blame on Gov. Granholm for this mess, (although they probably should have been penalized 50% originally) and I think that she has been getting a free pass for her role in this.
Posted by: Mike | May 31, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm
As a Michigan voter, I can echo the comments of the other Michiganders here. We all knew it didn’t count. It wasn’t a real primary. Everybody, including Senator Clinton, said it.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – the biggest problem the Dems have is a lack of backbone. In Congress and apparently on this issue too. The Michigan people I know play by the rules and to me the delegates should not be seated. How will this affect the general election vote? Not at all – our economy is awful and McCain has no solutions that are helpful.
Posted by: MIguy | May 31, 2008, 6:12 pm 6:12 pm
Forida was record turnout!!!!
Posted by: countallthevotes | May 31, 2008, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm
What I would like someone to explain is why Michigan and Florida had their primaries in Jan in the first place. They broke the rules and knew they broke the rules so they’re at fault period.
Theres really nothing to argue about. You should be penalized for breaking the rules. Somethings fishy here.
Florida in the middle of a voting scandal again!? Who wuda thunk it?
Posted by: Carlos | May 31, 2008, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm
@cgeast: You are spreading a half-truth. The “revote” was blocked because it would not allow all Democrats and Independents to vote. A caucus was blocked by our governor because she is a huge Clinton supporter and needs a job when her term-limited job here ends.
Posted by: MIguy | May 31, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
yet Obama blocked the revote.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
MI guy.
Michigan is a primary state. You redo a primary, not caucus.
The idiots who pulled a ‘rush limbaugh’ and voted for a republican who they would never support in a general election is wrong, and they dont deserve a revote.
Obama blocked the revote.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm
Revote was illegal, therefore any citizen who understands the rule of law should not accepte votes organized by Carvill and Ed Rendell. period.
Posted by: BKMC | May 31, 2008, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm
This is absurd. Everyone had the right to cast votes. Record numbers did just that.
Disenfranchisement is not counting those votes.
Posted by: s.b. | May 31, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
Hillary will likely gain 19 delegates from Florida and 5 from Michigan.
That’s a win for Obama
Posted by: Vanessa | May 31, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm
cgeast – No, YOU are wrong. It was the Michigan Republican-led legislature that refused to re-do the primary. Why? Because primaries cost a few million dollars with the cost borne by the state govt; because caucuses are paid by the political party, not the state; and because the Republican-majority of the legislature was more than willing to let the Democrats drag this battle out while canabalizing themselves.
Posted by: Killeen | May 31, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm
Obama said: I did not campaign in Florida, (so Florida vote shouldn’t count) – LIAR -According to Boston Globe, HeraldTribune and other sites, Obama airs “ads” on Cable stations in Florida. Even with the Florida cable ads, Obama still lost.
Posted by: gee | May 31, 2008, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm
yet Obama blocked the revotes.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm
Simple solution. There is still plenty of time before the convention. Have both states vote in early August.
Posted by: Buford Gooch | May 31, 2008, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm
Kileen.
WRONG. Clinton supporters fronted the money for the revote in Michigan. It wouldnt cost anyone a cent.
Obama blocked the revote.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm
Here are theMichigan Ballot Results
Hillary Rodham Clinton 328,309 55.2%
Uncommitted 238,168 40.1%
Dennis J. Kucinich 21,715 3.7%
Christopher J. Dodd 3,845 0.6%
Mike Gravel 2,361 0.4%
Delegates stripped by party.
Here is what happened in Michigan as reported in the Des Moines Register in October of 2007.
Obama’s internal polling showed he was going to get get landslided by Clinton in Michigan. His own polling had him behind by 20 points. So as a political calculation and to pander to Iowa voters in the upcoming caucus he made a gratuitous public gesture of taking his name off the ballot in Michigan, both because he knew he was going to lose big and to curry favor with Iowans and their first in the nation status. But at the same time he was making a deal with the Michigan Democratic Party for his name to be represented in the primary by the line “Uncommitted” and to have that publicized.
John Edwards joined the uncommitted line and every single voter in Michigan knew long before election day that to vote for Obama or Edwards you voted the “uncommitted line. It was well publicized and everyone knew it. And the proof that they knew it is that “uncommitted” received 40.7% of the vote, the second highest total, while Clinton received 56%. The rest went to the other candidates on the ballot
*(uninformed journalists and Obama supporters have often said Clinton was the only name on the ballot. Not so!).
Posted by: West Texas | May 31, 2008, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm
cgeast – No, you are mistaken, again.
There were serious legal and ethical issues about allowing Hillary Clinton’s supporters to PAY FOR A PRIMARY. Do I even need to explain to why that would an issue?!?
Furthermore, even if the MI Democratic party had agreed to allow outsiders to finance re-doing the primary (which the Obama camp WAS amenable to, as long as it was after the other scheduled primaries!), it was STILL THE MICHIGAN REPUBLICAN-LED LEGISLATURE THAT WOULD HAVE HAD TO APPROVE ANY PRIMARY RE-DO. THE REPUBS MADE IT CLEAR THAT SINCE THEIR PARTY FOUND A RESOLUTION TO THE ISSUE WITHOUT RE-DOING THE PRIMARIES, THAT THE DEMS SHOULD DO THE SAME.
Posted by: Killeen | May 31, 2008, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
“Uncommitted” was not a candidate. And Obama did not choose to be one either, in the Mi. primary.
Who was “uncommitted” in eyes of voters, Obama, Richardson, or Edwards?
How does uncommitted deserve any delegates, from a pragmatic, rational standpoint?
Normally when one forfeits a contest of any sort, they do not win anything.
Unless your name is “Barack Hussein Uncommitted”
Posted by: West Texas | May 31, 2008, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm
Why does either candidate deserve any delegates from a shame of a primary like Michigan?
Posted by: Shelost | May 31, 2008, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm
Yeah…. Hillary can run third party, Obama will loose!
Posted by: gee | May 31, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
If Obama supporters actually thought he was a sure thing they would not be clogging the blogs trying to alternately schmooz and demean HRC supporters.
They would instead be relishing their already announced victory and just chillin’.
Yet here they are? Why?
Because they know Obama has actually won nothing. All they have is hope.
We are here because we take nothing for granted, that anything is still possible, That Hillary is the only choice to win the GE, and that we Hillary Clinton supporters hold the absolute key to this election.
Without us, especially if multitudes vote for McCain because he is the best alternative to Obama, the DNC goes down in flames for the third straight time.
I welcome the Democratic Party implosion. Perhaps what arises from the rubble will be a truly Democratic Party, worthy of the Democracy element in its name
Posted by: West Texas | May 31, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
Obama supporters are here to mock and laugh at dillusional Hillary lovers like West Texas.
Posted by: Shelost | May 31, 2008, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm
First Vote say unity but no to Florida and Michigan getting full reinstatement.
You’ve sent a clear message to America, no more democracy coming from the Democratic Party! I do not live in Florida or Michigan but I will NOT VOTE Democratic come this next Election. All Americans get to vote equally or not at all. The people did not break the rules! Do you know what you can do with your rules?
Posted by: Anne | May 31, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
West Texas -
The MI Democratic Party INSTRUCTED VOTERS TO VOTE FOR “UNCOMMITTED” if they did not support Clinton!!!
The other candidates that were still in the race at that time and ALSO NOT ON THE BALLOT are willing to let Obama receive all of the non-Clinton votes (i.e., “uncommitted” votes).
All of the candidates except Clinton followed the recommendations of the Democratic Rules Committee and removed their names from the ballot. Neither Obama nor his supporters should be punished for following the rules.
Hillary’s view: “Keep changing the rules until I win! It’s only fair!”
Posted by: Killeen | May 31, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
Obama did not block the revotes
Facts should matter
In Florida – where I live – the facts are the Dem state Sen appvd the Jan 29th date and it was introduced by dem state sen Jeremy Ring — this is the unassailable fact (Sen Nelson’s twist today non with standing)
There was never going to be a revote because the voting machines were gone Jan 30th and still not back.
There was never going to be a mail in vote because it is against the Fl State Constitution to have a mail in vote count for a nomination
So the only chance for a revote was a caucus and the Clinton campaign blocked that idea
So vote as you wish in your own state but in OUR state this is the fact
We live in a society who accepts the rule of law
Posted by: alison | May 31, 2008, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm
large percentage HRC’s supporters will stay home or vote for McCain. Obama will loose in november.
Posted by: gee | May 31, 2008, 6:46 pm 6:46 pm
Killeen.
Lie much?
Show me the SOURCE where we can see the DNC instructing the candidates to take their name off the ballot.
put up or shut up.
Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm
Here are the official Michigan Ballot Results for Killeen and the rest who lie about who was on the MI. ballot, and why Obama took his name off.
Hillary Rodham Clinton 328,309 55.2%
Uncommitted 238,168 40.1%
Dennis J. Kucinich 21,715 3.7%
Christopher J. Dodd 3,845 0.6%
Mike Gravel 2,361 0.4%
Delegates stripped by party.
Here is what happened in Michigan as reported in the Des Moines Register in October of 2007.
Obama’s internal polling showed he was going to get get landslided by Clinton in Michigan. His own polling had him behind by 20 points. So as a political calculation and to pander to Iowa voters in the upcoming caucus he made a gratuitous public gesture of taking his name off the ballot in Michigan, both because he knew he was going to lose big and to curry favor with Iowans and their first in the nation status. But at the same time he was making a deal with the Michigan Democratic Party for his name to be represented in the primary by the line “Uncommitted” and to have that publicized.
John Edwards joined the uncommitted line and every single voter in Michigan knew long before election day that to vote for Obama or Edwards you voted the “uncommitted line. It was well publicized and everyone knew it. And the proof that they knew it is that “uncommitted” received 40.7% of the vote, the second highest total, while Clinton received 56%. The rest went to the other candidates on the ballot (uninformed journalists and Obama supporters have often said Clinton was the only name on the ballot. Not so).
Posted by: West Texas | May 31, 2008, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
On Dec. 10, 2007 the Mich Democratic Party’s Chairman, Mark Brewer, issued the following instructions to Dem voters urging them to vote in the MI primary:
LANSING – Today the Michigan Democratic Party released a voter guide to help voters understand the January 15, 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary.
“We want every eligible Democratic voter in Michigan to vote in the January 15, 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary,” said MDP Chair Mark Brewer. “This guide gives voters the details of the Primary and all of their voting rights so that every Michigan Democrat can participate in helping choose the 2008 Democratic presidential candidate. The guide is available on our website and we encourage voters to circulate it.”
Read the guide on the Internet here>
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Voter Guide On The January 15, 2008
Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary
1. Voters will vote at their regular polling places between 7 A.M. and 8 P.M.
2. Voters can vote by absentee ballot if they meet one of the requirements – out of town, age 60 or older, disability, etc.
3. The deadline to register to vote is 30 days before January 15, 2008 or December 17, 2007.
4. In order to vote at a polling place, a voter must show a photo ID or sign a statement that they do not have a photo ID with them. Absentee voters do not have to produce a photo ID.
5. Voters will be asked whether they want a Democratic or Republican ballot, and a record will be made of which ballot they take.
6. The voter’s choice of candidate will be secret as in all public elections.
7. The Democratic ballot will have 6 choices:
Hillary Clinton
Christopher Dodd
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Uncommitted
Write-in
8. A vote for “uncommitted” is a vote to send delegates to the Democratic National Convention who are not committed or pledged to any candidate. Those delegates can vote for any candidate they choose at the Convention.
9. Supporters of Joe Biden, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson are urged to vote “uncommitted” instead of writing in their candidates’ names because write-in votes for those candidates will not be counted.
NOTE: Dodd ended his campaign 12 days prior to the MI primary; I was technically wrong in saying that only one Dem candidate was on the ballot for the primary, however, Gravel & Kucinich were never major contenders and were no longer even included in the debates by that point in time.
Posted by: Killeen | May 31, 2008, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm
talking points memo is one of the gutter sources of info on the net…
jake, keep that in mind…it used to be somewhat objective in its facts and reporting, but no longer.
Posted by: al | May 31, 2008, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
Obama Lawyer Questions Wisdom of Michigan Revote
By Shailagh Murray Washington Post March 19, 2008
FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. — Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign has raised questions about a possible June 3 revote in Michigan, although the Democratic National Committee seems fine with the idea.
“We have recently been asked whether the legislation as proposed by Michigan would fit within the framework of the National Party’s Delegate Selection Rules,” DNC officials said in a statement. “Our review of this legislation indicates that it would, in fact, fit within the framework of the Rules.”
But Obama lawyer Robert F. Bauer raised several potential problems in a campaign memo released this morning, noting that the primary would be “unprecedented in conception and proposed structure,” as no other states has ever “re-run an election in circumstances like these.”
Like Florida, Michigan violated Democratic Party rules by moving up its primary date to the early weeks of the nominating process. The candidates declined to campaign in both states, and in Michigan, Obama went even further by removing his name from the ballot.
Searching for ways to close the delegate and popular-vote gap with Obama, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has actively sought revotes in both Michigan and Florida, although Sunshine State Democrats already have concluded that a second primary is unworkable. The Obama campaign has long held the position that it would abide by whatever party leaders decide — although it would prefer a solution that seats Michigan and Florida delegates at the Democratic National Convention without requiring voters to return to the polls.
Michigan state leaders are now awaiting Obama’s okay. Clinton is campaigning in Michigan today, seeking to pressure her rival to make a move.
But Bauer raised a series of legal concerns, including:
Voter Disqualification: Voters who participated in the Republican primary in January could not vote in the June election under the current proposal, including Democrats and independents.
Voter Protections: The new primary would be subject to pre-clearance under the federal Voting Rights Act, and Bauer noted the Justice Department may not be able to conduct a timely review. He also questioned whether military ballots could be distributed and collected in time.
Private Financing: Michigan’s plan to raise private funding to pay for the new primary may or may not be legal under federal election law, Bauer argued, raising possible liability issues for both candidates.
The Clinton campaign refuted each of Bauer’s points in its own lengthy memo, asserting, “We must either honor the original vote or hold a state-run primary that doesn’t leave the taxpayers footing the bill.”
Posted by: West Texas | May 31, 2008, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm
And now Michigan is done by a 19-8.
Florida and Michigan are now both DONE.
Posted by: Texas Voter | May 31, 2008, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm
SENATOR OBAMA DID BLOCK THE REVOTE IN MICHIGAN. THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN HAD EVERYTHING WORKED OUT BUT THE OBAMA SUPPORTERS IN MICHIGAN BLOCKED THE REVOTE.
OBAMA SUPPORTERS BLOCKED THE REVOTE
OBAMA SUPPORTERS BLOCKED THE REVOTE
OBAMA SUPPORTERS BLOCKED THE REVOTE
OBAMA SUPPORTERS BLOCKED THE REVOTE
OBAMA WOULD HAVE LOST AGAIN
Posted by: Michelle | May 31, 2008, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm
Bravo Icki!… we will see you in DENVER!
Posted by: gee | May 31, 2008, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm
Pledge delegate cannot change their votes, but pressure for superdelegates, they can change their votes, especially with Obama’s mask starts to reveal! Rev.Wright, Rezko, father pfleger!
Posted by: gee | May 31, 2008, 7:19 pm 7:19 pm
Since when do you assign delegates based on extrapolating from the number of people who did not vote?? Why even vote then? We can all just stay home and have the Rules Committee just choose their candidate!
Posted by: countallthevotes | May 31, 2008, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm
Good for you, Sally.
We are proud of you for being 100% honest, and not voting in your very legal primary.
All votes counted in the Fl. primary, only delegates were at issue!
Posted by: West Texas | May 31, 2008, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm
cgeast – Thanks for further supporting my statements with the following from your post:
1) Your post:
But Obama lawyer Robert F. Bauer raised several potential problems in a campaign memo released this morning, noting that the primary would be “unprecedented in conception and proposed structure,” as no other states has ever “re-run an election in circumstances like these.”
Response: Yes, the Obama campaign raised concerns abour re-running the election, but that is NOT THE SAME AS BLOCKING A REVOTE!!!
2) You posted:
THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN HAS LONG HELD THE POSITION THAT IT WOULD ABIDE BY WHATEVER PARTY LEADERS DECIDE– although it would prefer a solution that seats Michigan and Florida delegates at the Democratic National Convention without requiring voters to return to the polls.
Response: See above in bold letters. There has been no deviation from that position by the Obama campaign.
Futhermore, Bauer’s CONCERNS about voter disqualification, protection and financing are all legitimate concerns for the Obama campaign to ask in order to avoid creating an even bigger mess (i.e., the powers that be deciding to hold another primary & subsequently either having it blocked by the Justice Dept before it occurs or other legal matters nullifying the results and creating a further divided party and a divided convention).
At the end of the day, though, like I informed you, it was the Republican-led MI legislature that had the final say in whether to hold another primary, NOT Obama. Get over it!
Posted by: Killeen | May 31, 2008, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm
The question now for Hillary, after the DNC ruling:
“Will you be a divider or uniter for your beloved party?”
Your call.
Posted by: Janet | May 31, 2008, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
Obama did NOT block revotes.
Guess what?
According to MI state law, voting machines have to be locked 30 days to recount.
State elections in MI? May 6.
The revote proposal date? June 3.
The voting machines wouldn’t be available for the proposed revote date except by BREAKING STATE LAW!
Doesn’t matter how anyone FELT about the revote, it was IMPOSSIBLE to do it on the proposed date!
Chew on that, you democracy-hating crybabies.
Posted by: paganmist | May 31, 2008, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm
I cam here hoping somebody would shine a light on why MI and Florida held their primaries in January in the first place, knowing this is against party rules.
It seems the only people here are Hilary and Obama supporters who are not even smart enough to ask this question. They just want their candidate to be on top no matter what. I guess I’ve waisted my time.
Posted by: Carlos | May 31, 2008, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm
I live in Ann Arbor, Michigan and I did not bother to vote because it was made clear that the primary results would be invalidated. There are a gazillion people in my position. Granholm should be kicked out of office for allowing this travesty to occur. Clinton is a disgrace. How dare she attempt to hijack all the delegates when from Michigan when she knows darn well a competitive primary was not conducted here! Her actions tell volumes about her character.
Posted by: April Campbell | May 31, 2008, 7:53 pm 7:53 pm
paganmist
And that’s why Obama sent his lawyers to Michigan to stop the re-vote?
Posted by: Soetoro No! | May 31, 2008, 7:55 pm 7:55 pm
Michigan and Florida voters are worth 1/2 the vote other states receive. And who said Howard Dean wasn’t on of the greatest men walking the face of the earth?
Posted by: A | May 31, 2008, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
Now the question is: Will Clinton voters take their principles elsewhere or will they join the Obama (aka Soetoro) bandwagon.
Posted by: A | May 31, 2008, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm
Oh hell – if rules don’t count then what about laws? This is BS – and from now on anything goes….
Posted by: jozy | May 31, 2008, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm
OBAMA WINS WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP …
… for saying ‘uh’ more often in a half-hour than anyone else in the history of this planet.
Posted by: Soetoro No! | May 31, 2008, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm
Just heard Obama’s spin on leaving the church. That man is truly pathetic.
Posted by: A | May 31, 2008, 8:04 pm 8:04 pm
I’m pretty sure that the disenfranchised that Ms. Brazille was so concerned about will be heard loud and clear in Nov. along with every other American that believes in democracy.
The white house will be Republican for another four years. Way to go Dems! you did it again.
Posted by: s.b. | May 31, 2008, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm
Democratic Party – The Party of one
Sen. Barack Obama made it clear what he would “allow” the Democratic Rules & Bylaws Committee when it came to Florida and Michigan delegates. As each delegate so eloquently spoke, they railroaded 42 delegates away from Sen. Hillary Clinton. Many delegates spoke of the civil rights motions that starting true changed America in 1960s. Today’s rules committee showed that the 650,000 Democratic were not as important as the desires of one politician. Although Hispanics is the largest Democratic minority group, not one was on this important committee. One single minority group was given a dis-proportional percentage of all committee votes and they voted based on ethnic criteria and not in “what is in the best interest” of their party.
Sadly, the Democratic Rules & Bylaws Committee and Sen. Obama’s allowable rule reflected that the Democratic Party shows the Democratic Party has become the party of one. In the process, Sen. Clinton lost 42 delegates. In Florida alone, that same committee gave Sen. Obama 14% of Edwards delegates. Therefore, I suggest that the Democratic Party new slogan become “The Party of One”. In the normal Obama fashion, in normal symbolic fashion, Sen. Obama quit Trinity Church 19 month late. The typical Washington politician, in normal Bush political fashion, Sen. Obama actions has shown the type of politician he is. His only goal is to win and not the Democratic Party.
Posted by: Dr Hubert, Lt Col, USAF Retired | May 31, 2008, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm
HILLARY FANS, GIVE IT UP.
The elite insiders have spoken and they’ve named their puppet. That’s the end of that. So, what’s your plan B?
Posted by: S | May 31, 2008, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm
This outcome today only further disenfranchised the voters in Michigan and Florida and drives them to McCain’s camp. That being said, Barack Obama, as “presumptive nominee”, can take solace in the fact that he was completely outvoted by his competitor through the primaries that most closely resemble the general election. This second choice candidate better not try to blame the outcome of the general election on his competitor because the majority has spoken. We do not want him as the candidate, Hillary is the choice of the majority. More people in the history of the Democratic party nominating process have pulled the lever for Hillary Clinton than anyone else. How about them apples. Only some type of zombie would try to claim a victory out of that embarassing fact.
========================================
I am proud to be supporting Hillary Clinton!!
========================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | May 31, 2008, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm
Dr. Hubert,
I agree completely with your sentiments. Well said, well said.
========================================
Obama and BitterGate, we shall not forget!
========================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | May 31, 2008, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
I am an Obama supporter in Michigan who voted for McCain. I was clearly told that Democratic votes would not count, and I was unwilling to vote “uncommitted” on the off-chance that the delegates would be reinstated because I didn’t want somebody else potentially using my vote for someone other than Obama.
I voted for McCain because he was the least-worst Republican.
If we had had a re-vote in Michigan, I would not have been allowed to vote as a Democrat.
What part of “it won’t count” don’t we understand here? Where is the rule of law (rules, in this case)?
And how dare Harold Ickes claim this is a hijacked vote?
I am outraged by the shameless shifting arguments of the Clinton camp.
A middle-aged, venison-eating white woman in Michigan.
Posted by: Elcee | May 31, 2008, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm
I am ashamed to say that I voted for Hilary in the FL primary. My husband told me I would regret it. I hate it when he’s right. I just sent $50 to Barack Obama’s campaign.
Those Clinton supporters should be ashamed of themselves. She is acting like a childish brat who can’t accept that someone more talented has won the game. She’s willing to destroy the party if they won’t pick her. NEWSFLASH…it ISN’T all about YOU, Hillary, it’s about America.
Posted by: NOT disenfranchised in FL | May 31, 2008, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
West Texas wrote: Normally when one forfeits a contest of any sort, they do not win anything.
***
Normally when a candidate declares that a contest doesn’t count for anything, as Clinton did about Michigan, they don’t later try to argue the opposite… unless they have no principles.
Posted by: rst | May 31, 2008, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm
Jake Tapper makes a good point about the voters who didn’t vote because they were told their votes don’t count. Perhaps Florida and Michigan BOTH should have a new primary election, keeping the DNC OUT of the process.
It still bothers me that the boys in the Star Chamber are saying that voters in Florida and Michigan are only HALF as important as the rest of the country. What gives these party bosses the right to disenfranchise ANYONE… even halfway?!
How can it be called a “compromise” when an American’s voting rights are diminished?
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 8:32 pm 8:32 pm
I would be careful of wanting the primary to end on this note. The sooner Hillary is forced out by the Democratic bigwigs, the sooner her supporters go to work for John McCain.
Posted by: jdona | May 31, 2008, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm
rst… excuse me, but wasn’t it Obama who withdrew from Michigan? Not Clinton.
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 8:39 pm 8:39 pm
jdona… well stated! My wife and I are Hillary supporters (monetarily and philosophically), but we are ready to vote for McCain if we are forced to by the DNC. We haven’t given up hope completely, but the party bosses have made it clear who they are going to ram down our throats by whatever means it takes.
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm
Rhys – I didn’t say she withdrew, just that she herself said “what they’re doing in Michigan doesn’t count for anything”. For her to assert differently now seems hypocritical and unprincipled… surely the Clinton supporters can see that?
Posted by: rst | May 31, 2008, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm
I get a kick out of all the Repubs masquerading as Democrats supporting Hillary. Also, all the indignation from supporters that aren’t even Michigan or Florida voters. C’mon, people get real. You are just very, very transparent. I’m appalled that two states that broke the rules got seated at all. Both in favor of Hillary but that ya’ll are still belly-aching. Obama abides by the rules and he is the compromiser and yet he is still castigated. Something sure smells fishy. He played by the rules and won. Get over it and quit whining. I didn’t initially support Sen Obama but I do accept him as the Dem Presidential nominee and will wholeheartedly support and vote for him; the same as I would have done had Hillary or any other candidate win the nomination. Some of you really amaze me. Not the repubs pretending to be Hillary supporters but the actual Hillary supporters that are so venomous.
Posted by: CMSgt Gary Preston | May 31, 2008, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm
One other thing. If Hillary supporters want to vote for McCain, that is your right. Just don’t keep bellyaching about the economy, health care, perpetual war in the Middle east, the influence of lobbyist, the erosion of the middle class, etc., etc. If you liked Bush, believe me, you will LOVE McCain. He has nothing to lose. He’s already going to be 72 years old!
Posted by: CMSgt Gary Preston | May 31, 2008, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
“And this nomination will always have a question mark around it.”
You are under the false impression that FL and MI would have changed a single thing. Obama leads with or without them, it was over long ago and all any decision does it move when the ‘clinch’ date is.
Posted by: Gion | May 31, 2008, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
rst… I see your point, but why should Hillary have wasted any campaign time or money in a state where her main opponent wasn’t even on the ballot? It really was a worthless primary, which is why I have said Michigan should have a re-vote WITH Obama and Clinton BOTH on the ballot! If Obama wins Michigan, so be it; at least it would be FAIR.
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 8:50 pm 8:50 pm
Gary… I am a Hillary supporter and am not “masquerading” as ANYTHING! I wish I could have afforded to give her more than $275, but that’s the most I could spare. Hillary has a better understanding of the economy than either McCain OR Obama (or Bush, for that matter).
And, saying McCain will be “just like Bush” is silly; McCain has waffled on so many issues it’s hard to know where he stands on most of them.
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 8:53 pm 8:53 pm
Now that this is over and Obama is about to wrap things up I wonder what many of you Hillary lovers will do with yourselves. I guess you can always just keep blinding walking about claiming Hillary still has a chance.
Posted by: Shelost | May 31, 2008, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
Rhys, The DNC isn’t ramming anyone down anyone’s throat. We all get to vote. Obviously more of us voted for Obama than voted for Clinton…that is what Democracy is all about – we ALL get to vote…not just those who back Clinton.
Posted by: NanD | May 31, 2008, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
I am not angry with Obama supporters. For centuries, humans have been manipulated by “snake oil salesmen” whose charisma can sell ANYTHING. I don’t accuse Obama of asking his followers to drink poison or anything stupid like that, but he has mesmerized people into believing he can “change” everything that needs changing. How many Obama “believers” can actually say they know exactly what he plans to do? He can “talk the talk” but can he “walk the walk”? I don’t think so. It takes more than charisma to be an effective President.
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 8:58 pm 8:58 pm
Okay, so she moved the goalpost (again) BUT with 64 delegates Obama still wins…
Unite now like your life depends on it…otherwise McCain becomes Bush3.
He’s pro draft and anti-choice.
Obama 2008/2012
Posted by: oldwhiteguy | May 31, 2008, 8:59 pm 8:59 pm
Hillary voted for all was all for the rules. Then she cried and stomped her feet when she needed them changed.
Posted by: Shelost | May 31, 2008, 9:01 pm 9:01 pm
NanD… Unfortunately, NOT everyone was allowed to vote. That’s the problem and is the subject of this debate. We hear a lot about Florida and Michigan, but how about states with caucuses, where only a FEW make a decision for the many?
The entire primary process needs to be overhauled, giving EVERY state a BINDING vote, open to all eligible voters. There should be NO caucuses or conventions and NO delegates or “super” delegates.
If you like the way our primaries are run, then you must LOVE the Electoral college!
These procedures are outdated and need to be abolished.
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm
No one is shoving Obama down your throat-BUT a vote for McCain is a vote for the “draft” and against a woman’s right to choose.
THINK HARD- then vote Obama
Posted by: oldwhiteguy | May 31, 2008, 9:06 pm 9:06 pm
rhys, that all may be very true. But I would argue the place for doing that is not in an election year. If Clinton really felt that way why did she only argue that after she NEEDED TO??? Now thats disingenious.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 9:07 pm 9:07 pm
NanD…
If Obama wins FAIRLY, I can live with that. But give EVERY state a REAL primary election and do away with “smoke-filled room” politics! This sort of “decision-making” should have ended in the 1930′s.
America’s politics are NOT supposed to be run from a Star Chamber!
Posted by: Rhys | May 31, 2008, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
And why do Clinton supporters yell about having Obama shoved down their throats?? He won fair and square by a Democratic process. To me it would be shoving him down your throats if he got the nomination but didn’t win it(Like Clinton).
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
oldwhiteguy
Actually, it was a couple of democratic senators who suggested we resume the draft. Then, there’s you codeword ‘right to choose’ for partial birth abortions where the brains are sucked out of a child’s brain before he draws his first breath.
Posted by: Aston | May 31, 2008, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
Michigan resident and Obama / Edwards supporter. Neither my husband nor I voted in the Dem primary (we would have voted uncommitted) or in the Republican primary.
Posted by: Kathy Cole | May 31, 2008, 9:10 pm 9:10 pm
Why BO didn’t want a revote in those two states?
That would have settled the issue in a clear manner.
What is in his head?
The same way it’s hard to understand the reactions of his supporters.
I read the comments posted by them in the blog after the article written by Ferraro about investigating sexism and racism in this campaign (NY Times), if you are a Hillary supporter you would feel cured from wanting to have anything to do with them at all. Just pure ruthless hatred.
Posted by: Jane | May 31, 2008, 9:10 pm 9:10 pm
Rhys – give it up…the issue with MI/FL was a rare occurrence…and the issue is not that people were not allowed to vote – it was that they were told up front that their vote would not count…THAT was the issue…and one does not change the rules in the middle – or toward the end – of the game. In light of the masterful manner in which the DNC handled it, I do not expect that this will happen again.
And, for those of us who have now seen first hand what a problem our voting system can cause, we need to take active steps to overhaul it in a meaningful way…for the NEXT primaries!
Posted by: NanD | May 31, 2008, 9:10 pm 9:10 pm
Ashton…
thanks for the “feedback”, but there was nothing ‘coded’. McCain can’t stay in Iraq,100 years, let alone going to war with Iran without the draft.
And say what you will about abortion-its a woman’s choice, and politicians can’t deny that.
Posted by: oldwhiteguy | May 31, 2008, 9:15 pm 9:15 pm
Why is it so many of HRC supporters call themselves feminists, but want HRC to be treated with kid gloves?? Didn’t a former president say if you don’t wanna get tarnished don’t get into politics?? Oh my bad, that was before the shoe was on the other foot.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
I am one of the “disenfranchised” Michigan voters who didn’t vote because I was told the primary would not count. No great solution exists at this point. But, after sitting through the RBC Hearings in person all day and into the evening, I am pleased with the resolution.
Posted by: Bryan | May 31, 2008, 9:37 pm 9:37 pm
All you people that REFUSE to vote for Obama, no matter what, are you crazy? Do you want 4 more years of Bush policies? Do you want two more conservatives of the supreme court? Are you so short sighted that you would flush the country because you didn’t get your own way?
I’m a Hillary supporter, but at some point in time, you must do what is good for our country. No more republicans in office.
Posted by: JR | May 31, 2008, 9:37 pm 9:37 pm
They shouldnt have seated the delegates at all… The elections were not true or fair elections.
You can not tell people it doesnt matter and then later change the rules and say it counts the rules where the election doesnt mater so they do not show a true example of the will of the people.
That would never happen here the rules said the election dont count.. So they should not count.
Are you living in America or Russia ?
The Only way the party should have been seated is if they where split 50/50 so in reality then the election had didnt count with regards to giving anyone any benifit.
Just my two cents.
Posted by: aussie_watcher | May 31, 2008, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm
I voted. Why didn’t Obama supporters feel the need to support their candidate on 29 Jan? I still take my voting rights serious and I will vote for Nader on Nov 4.
Posted by: Tina from Florida | May 31, 2008, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm
well, i did not get a chance to watch
this proceeding in the first run.
so i am watching on cspan now the rerun.
i am beginning to not like the feel of all of this.
this party this and party that.
crowded room, charts etc.
cheering,and booing.
i am going to get some popcorn and watch the movie REDS with warren b. and diane k.
because after hearing the out come
IT IS ALL JUST A BUNCH OF BOL-SHEVIK!
Posted by: america for all | May 31, 2008, 9:43 pm 9:43 pm
Lol. Tina, if you took your vote serious you would’t be voting for Nader.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm
J, so what about the disinfranchised people who didn’t vote because BOTH our respective candidates said they wouldn’t?? If you guys REALLY cared about the voters you’d follow the rules.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Florida increase in voting in 2008 over 2004 primary was at least on a par with other states. Here are examples. Especially look at South Carolina , which immediately preceded Florida and where there was unequalled enthusiasm for Obama. The African-American vote in Florida in 2008 was 2.25 times the 2004 primary vote. Rev. Al Sharpton was on the 2004 Florida primary ballot. (Estimates based on CNN numbers.)
Wisconsin: 35% increase over 2004
Virginia: 149% increase over 2004
South Carolina: 82% increase over 2004
Florida: 135% increase over 2004 (maybe more: final State numbers considerably higher than CNN)
Posted by: Lulubelle | May 31, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
The Oracle, why would I vote for someone who is unqualified? Nader 08, LOL to you.
Posted by: Tina from Florida | May 31, 2008, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm
Tina from Florida,
You voted in an election that Hillary Clinton said herself wouldnt count right ?
You wanted to be heard and you where around the world.. I heard he in Australia the Million of people in FL voted in an election, that was a beauty contest again Clinton used those words herself.
We over here had great respect for everyone in FL for taking part in an election that didnt count.
That now has been soured the DNC should only have split the election 50/50 so it gave no one any benifit.
Now those extra delegates gave to Hillary Clinton make what was a truely honourable protest of the people of FL a masive joke.
I liked Hillary Clinton I think your media has been mean to her. I dont think Barack has done anything wrong to her and do find it upseting that people blame him for what the media or some preist says even though Clinton was my choice.
I do as an Allied nation hope the democratic party does unite behind whoever wins the nomination as the world cant afford another republican government!
Posted by: aussie_watcher | May 31, 2008, 9:51 pm 9:51 pm
Tina, we’ll see how much you’re laughing when McCain takes away womens rights. So much for feminism. Lol.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
Tina, and you people really think theres some sort of litmus test to be Commander in Chief?? Lol. Wow. Now thats a hoot.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 9:55 pm 9:55 pm
Finally the Horror movie is coming to an end, I almost ran out of popcorn. Can’t wait for Pt.2 to start in Nov.
Hey guys book your tickets now. See ya
Posted by: Chan | May 31, 2008, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm
Why can’t you understand some of us just don’t think Obama is the right person to run this country. Nader 08, hopefully we will have more choice in 2012.
Posted by: Tina from Florida | May 31, 2008, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm
The DNC broke their OWN rules today by deciding to award votes to a candidate (Obama) who received NONE.
Michigan needs to have a revote on August 4th when they have a statewide election already on the ballot, it takes place well before the DNC convention on August 24th. It’s the perfect solution. It’s the fair solution since Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan. It would give legitimacy to the end result.
Florida needs to be counted as it stands with a penalty (according to the DNC “rules” Obama should penalized for breaking the rules) to Obama who broke the rules and campaigned there with ads all over the states. In fairness, Hillary broke no rules in Florida.
Count all the votes. Any compromise is unacceptable because you are still disenfranching voters. I stood with Rep. John Conyers in 2004 demanding that ALL the votes be counted and now John Conyers is actively working with the Obama campaign to disenfranchise the voters of Michigan. It’s disgusting. Obama should be ashamed. The Democratic party,no matter who you support should be outraged that ANY voter is disenfranchised.
The entire primary process needs an overhaul. The caucuses should be eliminated. The calendar should be changed. The process is too long and too expensive. The process is unfair state to state.
Keep fighting Hillary, you can prevail.
This great nation is worth fighting for. Country first, party second.
Posted by: J | May 31, 2008, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm
NO ONE could be as bad as Bush.
Posted by: Tina from Florida | May 31, 2008, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm
DEAR FELLOW DEMOCRATS;
THE BAD REPUBLICANS ARE FLOATING AROUND TO DIVIDE AND CONKER……. DON’T FALL FOR THERE TRICKS……. THEY TRICKED US INTO A WAR THAT HAS CAUSED US THOUSANDS OF OUR BEST AMERICAN MEN AND WOMEN…….. LETS PUT AN END TO THIS BS AND UNITE NOW…….. IN ANY RACE WE HAVE A WINNER AND A LOSER. BUT DEMOCRATS ARE ON THE SAME TEAM…….HELLO…..JUST THINK OF THE OLYMPICS RACE WHERE TWO OR MORE OF THE US RUNNERS ARE IN THE SAME RACE, WE DONT CARE WHICH ONE WINS AS LONG AS IT IS AMERICA THAT WINS.
they are really after the hillary supporters because john mcsame needs help. Just look at the mess the republ. have put us in. economy,housing,markets,poorly handled wars. want more of the same vote for mccain.
Posted by: MR USA | May 31, 2008, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm
Tina, I can respect that. It’s just hilarious that in your quest to get a woman President, you will set womens rights back 50 yrs. Just a fact. But oh so Ironic, and kind of selfish.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 10:00 pm 10:00 pm
MSM has already set women’s rights back. I like to call MSNBC the caveman network.
Posted by: Tina from Florida | May 31, 2008, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
Lol. Well said Derek. And Tina, even though thats not true I’ll indulge you. So you would go further to denigrate the cause because YOU didn’t get what you wanted?? Like I said, selfish….
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 10:10 pm 10:10 pm
Dems loose with Obama.
Dems wins with Clinton.
It’s that simple.
Posted by: S. Johnsen | May 31, 2008, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm
If its so simple Johnson, why did she lose the pop vote, the pledged delegates, and SuperD’s and she had the name brand recognition?? Reminds me of this past superbowl personally.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm
Roxanne,
You mean like Michelle Obama??
Posted by: countallthevotes | May 31, 2008, 10:13 pm 10:13 pm
I think Derek and Roxanne have a right to say what they want, alot of us are tired of the crying, pandering, accusing, and rules changing that Clinton has employed.
Posted by: The Oracle | May 31, 2008, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm
I don’t want is Obama as much as you don’t want Clinton.
Posted by: Tina from Florida | May 31, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
Aussie_watcher
Thank you for you input I think what you wrote is true the DNC should have just spilt them 50/50 so no one benifited from what was an election that wouldnt count. I have to say the reason they gave Clinton extra votes in FL was to try and take into account the fact that people did vote for Clinton there even though I am a Barack Obama supporter I feel they tried to make everyone happy and in the end made no one happy.
Just a point to the people saying that Barack Obama doesnt have the experince to lead:
Barack Obama has held public office for 11.6 years
Hillary Clinton has held public office for 6 years.
So in making that argument you are really dissing Hillary not Barack.
Being married to a president does not make you qualified to be one.
Obama 08 12
Posted by: Kate | May 31, 2008, 10:17 pm 10:17 pm
I think half you people could care less about either Hillary or Barack and are only here to cause further tensions in the Democratic Party which ever side you on Hillary or Obama will be much better presidents than John McSame.
Prochoice =Hillary and Barack
NoChoice= John McSame
the next president will get to appoint to judges to the beanch.. It only takes one more vote to overturn Roe V Wade…
Something McCain has promised to do.
Time to let the next three states to vote and then unite behind the winner!
Democrats 08
Posted by: Kate | May 31, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
Obama’s speech tonight looked like an 8th grader making his first debate appearance. New direction? I don’t think so!
Posted by: Aston | May 31, 2008, 10:26 pm 10:26 pm
Kate
But Obama is a real loser.
Posted by: Aston | May 31, 2008, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm
J,
Back up your claim that Obama himself has been sexist to Hillary Clinton ?
Give some examples of what he himself said about or to her that are or where sexist ?
Posted by: Kate | May 31, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
I am a woman and I WILL NOT PROTEST AT DENVER.
Clinton lost fair and square AND THOUGH I SUPPORTED HER, I AM NOT A CLINTON CULT MEMBER AND…
I WILL NOT COMMIT DEM. PARTY MASS SUICIDE WITH CLINTON.
NO TO MCCAIN.
Posted by: Flo | May 31, 2008, 10:47 pm 10:47 pm
I Wish to second the words of Flo:
“I am a woman and I WILL NOT PROTEST AT DENVER.
Clinton lost fair and square AND THOUGH I SUPPORTED HER, I AM NOT A CLINTON CULT MEMBER AND…
I WILL NOT COMMIT DEM. PARTY MASS SUICIDE WITH CLINTON.
NO TO MCCAIN.”
Posted by: Kate | May 31, 2008, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
justsaying roxanne who are you guys suporting I cant tell anymore ?
Posted by: Kate | May 31, 2008, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm
Kate, I’m supporting whoever gets the nomination.
Posted by: justsaying | May 31, 2008, 10:56 pm 10:56 pm
Obama, obama, obama. YES WE CAN
Posted by: justsaying | May 31, 2008, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm
Thanks Kate and Flo.
I knocked on doors for Al Gore and I knocked on doors for Clinton in Texas.
I am a staunch Dem. P. member and I believe the party is bigger than my candidate.
So yes, NO TO MCCAIN.
Posted by: Jessica | May 31, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
but obama, obama
no he wont
Posted by: justsaying | May 31, 2008, 10:59 pm 10:59 pm
United we stand devided we and our chilren will fall.
Thank you for your past work Jessica.
DEMS UNITE
Posted by: Kate | May 31, 2008, 11:02 pm 11:02 pm
MrUSA,
Go ahead and vote for your Obama hero…just as Germany during struggling times and a bad economy voted for their leader over 65 years ago. A man who promised change..A man who gave them hope. A man who almost distroyed a race. A man who put the world at war. Dont talk about Rep. starting a war as if the Dem didnt agree with it. You can say Bush didnt tell them everything. YOu can say Bush lied. But both Dem and Rep were lied to by Bush. So chill on blaming the Rep. I am neither Rep. or Dem. I am for the one I believe will be best for this country..McCain was not my first choice but Obama was never a choice. Hillary never impressed me either. Yet Im not blinded with bitterness of how this country is now. Logic states simple. One does not belong to a organization for 20 years and not believe in what is being said or done. One does not contribute money to a cause they do not believe in. You state Obama has 11 years of service against Hillary’s 6. Look at how is first got in to office. Obama is not this great savor to this country. He is not this great hope for this promis of change. Red Flags fly above Obama and saidly he plays on people like you who are bitter, and who are blind and are mesmerized to his speaches like so many did so long ago.
Wake up. Get educated to his church and what they have tought over the years…then tell me that Obama is this great man you make him out to be. YOu think Bush is bad..wait and see the changes Obama will bring if elected to office.
We soldiers might not always agree with decision that our Chief makes. However, we do our duty. We support and do our jobs. Mr. USA were you ever in the armed forces? Unless you have, please dont make this war to be about lies. We fight for freedom of those who are appressed…we fight for those who have attact us. We fight to protect our nation against freedom fighters with there high and mighty hate for this country. I have been shot at…I have been distrught as I have seen my fellow soldier get blown to little pieces. I hate to think Obama would pull out our troops, just to figure out that it was not time and our soldiers get sent back to redo what was started.
I know how we got into this war…but I also know it is not over oil and not for a wasted cause. My father faught in WWII to save us from a man full of promises who killed millions. I faught for our country to help save another country from a dictator. My son fights now for us to protect us from another 9/11. Lets face it we all wanted to destroy the nation who attact us then…We wanted our revenge..Well we are getting it. With war comes sarafice and yes death of soldiers. Don’t shame them with words of a war of lies..or war made from deceit.
Posted by: paul | May 31, 2008, 11:02 pm 11:02 pm
Paul, if your post was more concise I’d probably read it.
For now, before I end my day all I can do is dash in and out of Political Punch to say OBAMA ’08.
Posted by: Jeremy | May 31, 2008, 11:07 pm 11:07 pm
I caucaused for Clinton in Iowa. It was a cold winter night and I still went out despite my having a flu.
By the time Clinton got to W. Virgina, she was a beer guzzling, gun totting Republican Annie Oakley.
SO DON’T WORRY KATE. DEMS WILL UNITE – SOME OF US ARE AGHAST AT HILLARY’S RADICAL METARMORPHOSIS.
Posted by: Liz | May 31, 2008, 11:14 pm 11:14 pm
Liz
Thank you : )
Posted by: Kate | May 31, 2008, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm
they are really after hillary’ supporters because they know the dnc, msm- did hillary and her supporters wrong.
and you know what,
they have us.
now if you want to blame someone
blame that YEEHI-ing Howard Dean
and that grinning nancy pelosi
Posted by: justsaying | May 31, 2008, 11:52 pm 11:52 pm
Order:
Please note that not all feminists are Clinton “cult members.”
Yes, it would be nice if she won but she has not.
That does not mean the CAUSES of the Dem. Party die with her campaign.
DEMS ALL THE WAY.
Posted by: Lucy | May 31, 2008, 11:55 pm 11:55 pm
I’m so grateful to cgeast and others on here for being so much more knowledgable about what is going on in my state than I am. It is truly wondrous to have these geniuses around to talk down to the people whose votes they wanted to count.
I really am starting to believe that many of the so-called HRC supporters here are Republicans posing as supporters. The only thing gained by her continued fight is the end of her political career – seems to me that’s what the Republicans want.
Posted by: MIguy | May 31, 2008, 11:58 pm 11:58 pm
justsaying, actually I have heard people say that. There was a fool on here that just posted that nonsense a few threads ago. I just hope evrybody comes to their senses and stops the unabashed hating. There has to be winners and losers. I just hope some people will stop trying to coddle HRC. She lost. If Obama lost I’d be voting for her. But I can’t be mad, just like kids take on traits from their parents. I guess voters take on the attitudes of their candidates. *Shrugs*
Posted by: The Oracle | June 1, 2008, 12:00 am 12:00 am
MIguy, its not that. They’re just masking their hopes for a Clinton Presidency behind counting votes. If they REALLY cared about ya’ll, they’d have been doing all this BEFORE Clinton was losing. And you notice how none of them seem to care about the disinfranchised who DIDN’T vote.
Posted by: The Oracle | June 1, 2008, 12:03 am 12:03 am
That’s really rich. The Obama loving DNC voted to disfranchise Florida’s voters, but now that counting the actual election would benefit Hillary Clinton and hurt Saint Obama, the DNC suddenly cares about the voters they disenfranchised.
What makes it even more rich is the fact that Hillary’s campaign went out of their way to enfranchise these same voters by having another vote, but the DNC voted to keep the voters disenfranchised. But now they care about them because the Obama campaign came up with some kind of BS excuse to game the elections and steal votes that he never earned.
Posted by: OPxyCon | June 1, 2008, 12:17 am 12:17 am
OPxyCon: Now thats rich. So it doesn’t bother you in the least that Clinton doesn’t care?? Really?? You can’t see that shes doing this cuz she needs the votes?? So let me get this straight, the ONE person that followed the rules should be punished?? Because thats what you’re saying. Please answer….
Posted by: The Oracle | June 1, 2008, 12:20 am 12:20 am
The nerve of some of you. I can’t believe that you people actually think everything should count and Obama shouldn’t get ANY votes or delegates in Mi right?? Can someone PLEASE TELL ME WHY WE HAVE RULES??
Posted by: The Oracle | June 1, 2008, 12:24 am 12:24 am
I guess rules don’t count when your an ex-President’s wife.
Posted by: The Oracle | June 1, 2008, 12:25 am 12:25 am
i LIKE MR USA
I LIKE MR USA !
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 12:30 am 12:30 am
Any HRC supporters to answer those questions??? *eyes blinking*
Posted by: The Oracle | June 1, 2008, 12:31 am 12:31 am
Dems who will vote McCain were never really Dems to begin with.
Posted by: Madge | June 1, 2008, 12:34 am 12:34 am
Posted by: Madge | Jun 1, 2008 12:34:48 AM
sorry, dem of 36 years, never voted rep…check dnc records.
will not vote for racist, un-american, uninformed candidate in bho
Posted by: pp | June 1, 2008, 12:51 am 12:51 am
To all those women who somehow feel that they are not treated equally like men,
You are full of BS. If you have that type of psycho feeling take it out with your man at home, beat him up and thrash him, do whatever you can at home.
Dont show up on the street or in front of conventions to take out on ordinary fair minded citizens, who refuse to be manipulated by a liar like Bosnian Hilary. Solve your problems at home, whining kids!
Posted by: marie | June 1, 2008, 1:24 am 1:24 am
The only more corrupt politicians than Senator Barack Obama are in jail.
AMERICA IS IN TROUBLE. Giving him delegates in Michigan is his new version of politics. His name was not on the ballot and he deserved no delegates. He violated the rules in Florida and Michigan. CORRUPT ELECTION. I and my family and friends will be voting for Senator McCain, a real American.
Posted by: Mary | June 1, 2008, 1:49 am 1:49 am
My father is ill and we can barely afford his treatment costs.
For me throwing tantrums over Clinton and risking a McCain White house is out of the question.
Posted by: Kelly | June 1, 2008, 1:53 am 1:53 am
Mary,
Read what they Australia person wrote make alot of sense:
“They shouldnt have seated the delegates at all… The elections were not true or fair elections.
You can not tell people it doesnt matter and then later change the rules and say it counts the rules where the election doesnt mater so they do not show a true example of the will of the people.
That would never happen here the rules said the election dont count.. So they should not count.
Are you living in America or Russia ?
The Only way the party should have been seated is if they where split 50/50 so in reality then the election had didnt count with regards to giving anyone any benifit.
Just my two cents.”
&
“You voted in an election that Hillary Clinton said herself wouldnt count right ?
You wanted to be heard and you where around the world.. I heard he in Australia the Million of people in FL voted in an election, that was a beauty contest again Clinton used those words herself.
We over here had great respect for everyone in FL for taking part in an election that didnt count.
That now has been soured the DNC should only have split the election 50/50 so it gave no one any benifit.
Now those extra delegates gave to Hillary Clinton make what was a truely honourable protest of the people of FL a masive joke.
I liked Hillary Clinton I think your media has been mean to her. I dont think Barack has done anything wrong to her and do find it upseting that people blame him for what the media or some preist says even though Clinton was my choice.
I do as an Allied nation hope the democratic party does unite behind whoever wins the nomination as the world cant afford another republican government!”
Dont you think ?
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 1:55 am 1:55 am
Kelly,
Im sorry for your dad and you speak the truth!
Dems unite!
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 1:57 am 1:57 am
Obama’s campaign will be studied for a long time by both friends and foes.
It was a classic David v. Goliath and boy didn’t he bring down the “inevitable.”
Instead of ranting and raving, Clinton should HUMBLE HERSELF AND TAKE NOTES.
Posted by: Meredith | June 1, 2008, 2:23 am 2:23 am
Barack Obama is more all-American
than George Washington who was
British.
Posted by: anon | June 1, 2008, 2:30 am 2:30 am
Anon, Americans who can’t make peace with Obama’s mixed heritage are the most closeted you have ever met.
They are the type missing out on the New America…have hardly socialised beyond their kitchen gardens.
Posted by: Diana | June 1, 2008, 2:51 am 2:51 am
This Democrat will vote McCain if Hillary is not nominated. Like it or not, it’s my right. So, get used to it.
Posted by: ablanche08 | June 1, 2008, 2:53 am 2:53 am
Thanks for informing as Ablanche ’08 but no need to -
we know you really are Republican anyway but was too ashamed to admit it in light of Bush’s high negativity ratings.
Posted by: Amy | June 1, 2008, 3:02 am 3:02 am
Amy,
Go Amy Go Amy…
I love it
Democrats 08
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 3:35 am 3:35 am
jpt have you seen this ?
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 4:41 am 4:41 am
hey einstein,
last i checked, bill clinton wasn’t running for office.
Posted by: trustthesky | June 1, 2008, 5:27 am 5:27 am
Republicans have put up with slanted biased media for years.
we have Fox and talk radio while Democrats pretty have the major networks, newspapers, magazines etc. “Count all the votes” has a familiar ring to it no”? By the way, allthe Bush/Gore votes were counted a couple of times and Bush did win. But Republicans have had to sit and listen to Bush stole the election” for years. Perhaps this Democrat hoopla will make Democrats sit back, take a good hard look and finally see what’s been heaped on republicans. But I won’t hold my breath for that.
Posted by: Kathy | June 1, 2008, 6:58 am 6:58 am
Republicans stole that election… Did you not see Recount ?
The FL an Michigan’s votes had/has no effect on the out come so you comparison is not appropriate.. In fact its as stupid as you TV station and your political party.
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 7:08 am 7:08 am
Bush won the electorals and in a study done by the accounting firm of BDO Seidman in 2001, Bush would have widened his 537 vote victory to a 1,665 margin if the Supreme court had been allowed to continue Bush won Florida-period. And yes, I watched “Recount” and found it to be much slanted to the left. Now it’s time for the Dems to resort to name calling, don’t you always?
Posted by: Kathy | June 1, 2008, 7:32 am 7:32 am
Posted by: HeatherinVT | Jun 1, 2008 7:45:30 AM
so after your tirade dissing hillary, ickes,and her supporters do you want her to campaign for bho, and her supporters to vote for him?
Posted by: rt | June 1, 2008, 7:54 am 7:54 am
Kathy you need to stop watching fox and join the real world there is no left and right when your talking about people… We are one people we are one nation! Stop being devided by BS.. Bush stole the election and its been the biggest mistake in Americas history.. Bush will always been known as our worst President and your grandchildren will be paying for this war long after we are gone!
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 7:58 am 7:58 am
Posted by: rt | Jun 1, 2008 7:54:19 AM
I do not think in my letter I had anything negative to say about Hillary supporters.
and to be honest with you it would be okay with me if Team Clinton took the rest of the political season off.
Her campaign has operated in such a fashion that gives us all a first hand view of all that is wrong with politics. I have had numerous Hillary supporters say to me…”That is Just Politics”….the only way we can move past our government acting in abhorant way and out of self interest or corporate interest – is to STOP letting people get away with using such excuses for disgraceful and shameful behavior.
We the people need to stop allowing politicians to make a mockery out of our government and democracy.
Posted by: HeatherinVT | June 1, 2008, 8:08 am 8:08 am
rt,
I was supported Hillary and now am supporting Barack Obama he won fair and square. We all must unite to make sure McSame dos not see the seat of power.
There is to much at stake to play games this time!
The democrats are going to win in 08
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 8:11 am 8:11 am
RT
Yes at this point I can say …I finally hate Hillary Clinton…a year ago I was campaigning for her in NH.
but it is not about the individual …it is about the country.
Yes if Hillary Clinton says she cares about the soldiers, healthcare, the poor, the environment, multicultures, women’s rights…
she will camapign vigoruosly for the candidate that holds those things in high regard and who has promised to fight for them.
This is not about HILLARY as much as you all like to think it is.
It is about the country but Hillary, your candidate has lead you all down a path to forget that.
There were as many voters that would have been disenfranchised by the Clinton plan…as Obama’s…the committee found away around that.
and did you all know that Obama had the votes for the 50/50 split…but they did not do that out of respect for Hillary’s supporters.
You all have been blinded by a woman I now…have come to hate.
Posted by: dl | June 1, 2008, 8:19 am 8:19 am
If we’re gonna take into account voters who didn’t bother to vote, lets also take into account caucus goers who would have attended state Caucus’ but had to work, couldn’t get a sitter, had no transportation, were bullied out of the caucus halls, couldn’t understand the rules, couldn’t be there on time, etc. The DNC gave Obama delegates based on “exit polls” (delegates he didn’t earn from voters), so lets guess about the participants at the Caucus’ in states that can’t even give us a number of attendees. Lets just guess at those. The DNC is really messed up. This all was gamed well before the nomination process began. Again, the rules said that a candidate that campaigns, get zero delegates. The Obama camp ran ads in Florida up to the day before our primary. In Michigan, there were flyers distributed by Obama, Richardson, Edwards to get people to vote “uncommitted”. Those rules were ignored.
Posted by: glenn mcgahee | June 1, 2008, 8:46 am 8:46 am
Kate, you wrote: “Bush stole the election and its been the biggest mistake in Americas history.”
You can say that as often as you want…but it doesn’t make it true. Actually it as VP Al Gore and the Democratic controlled Florida State Supreme Court who attempted to steal the election by cherry picking a handful of counties with large Democratic majorities to have recounted. The Florida State Supreme Court changed the rules in the middle of the election; AND they allowed the different counties to count the votes differently. It was on this latter point in which the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the Florida State Supreme Court had violated the U. S. Constitution. Furthermore, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the Florida State Supreme Court could not change Florida state law as to the dates set forth for certifying the election. VP Al Gore should have called for a statewide recount from the very beginning. Now then, several newspapers sent teams down to Florida and they unofficially recounted the votes and concluded that George W. Bush did, in fact, end up with more votes — and according to all the rules at the time — the one with the most votes WON.
Posted by: James Danley | June 1, 2008, 8:57 am 8:57 am
Anon, you wrote: “Barack Obama is more all-American than George Washington who was British.”
But without George Washington, Barack Obama (and the rest of us) would be British!
Posted by: James Danley | June 1, 2008, 9:08 am 9:08 am
glenn mcgahee
“If we’re gonna take into account voters who didn’t bother to vote, lets also take into account caucus goers who would have attended state Caucus’ but had to work, couldn’t get a sitter, had no transportation, were bullied out of the caucus halls, couldn’t understand the rules, couldn’t be there on time, etc.”
There is a masive difference the people in Fl and Michigan where told the election didnt count… It wasnt that the had other things to do it was the election didnt matter and then suddenly it did because Hillary said so…
The rules where it didnt count and thats how it should have stayed..
In the end it means nothing it doesnt change the out come of the election!
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 9:08 am 9:08 am
Paul, you wrote: “You can say Bush lied. But both Dem and Rep were lied to by Bush.”
Actually it was Saddam Hussein who lied. Saddam wanted his neighbors to continue to believe that he had WMDs. I would very much like to know how it was Bush’s lie that caused Congress to authorize regime change in Iraq back in 1998? While debating that resolution, many Democrats stood on the floor of the House and Senate and warned of the threat (and in some cases “imminent threat”) that Saddam Hussein posed with his WMDs.
Posted by: James Danley | June 1, 2008, 9:18 am 9:18 am
James Danley,
Are you for real ? We gave him he WMDS We America and the UK gave them to him look it up we played Iraq against Iran until this dumb twit Bush decided we would take Iraq and all it oil…
Donald rumsfeild gave Iraq wmds.
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 9:37 am 9:37 am
The primaries are over. A loss is a loss and Hillary has lost.
Rules are rules. Let’s move on.
Obama ’08.
Posted by: Mary | June 1, 2008, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
Kate, even if what you say is true…then explain to me how it is that Bush lied? Finally, if we went into Iraq for all of its oil, explain how it is that we still don’t have ANY of Iraq’s oil?
Posted by: James Danley | June 1, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
As a floridian that DID vote, I think the votes should not have been counted based on the fact that the DNC said it wouldn’t seat the delegates. It is not right to change the rules at the end of the game. Both candidates agreed to not seat those two states delegates because they broke the rules. It is really as simple as that. They were told their delegates would not be seated if they moved up their primary, they chose to do it anyway. Therefore, they should have suffered the penalty. I knew when I went to the polls that my vote wouldn’t count, I only went to show my daughter the voting process and explain it to her. I was already aware that our votes wouldn’t count and I was okay with that because everything has rules and life has consequences for breaking them. So for the record, this floridian voter did not feel disenfranchised and not having the votes counted would not have swayed me from voting in November.
Posted by: Cynthia | June 1, 2008, 11:23 pm 11:23 pm
Dems are disappointing me as a dem. No wonder repubs win more. They stick together even if they hate McCain. We on the other hand like to divide ourselves into parts. Those parts are black, white, hispanic, gay, middle class or lower class and we lose everytime. Seperate and lose exerytime. It’s bigger any one person. This is about the damn country you claim to love. We can barely afford gas, food and various other things we’ll need to survive. All of these HRC people are crying about how she lost. She lost by thinking it was all hers to begin with. Those were her own words. Delegates will show why and yet You all are here talking of voting for McCain. LMAO, because you’ll get what you deserve. No retirement to make it on, $7 a gal gas and a draft for your sons to go to bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran. Thanks and the republicans thank you too.
Think of more than yourselves for once. I know I will vote a dem no matter who it is because for every time a bill came thru the house republicans followed suit and helped bush. Dems are always seperated. Don’t be fooled with your heart, think with your head. I can’y stand another war or the 9 trill debt we’re facing. McCain admits he dont doesnt know economics and my wallet can’t chance that.
Peace
Posted by: jdubwill | June 1, 2008, 11:25 pm 11:25 pm
James Danley
On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/06/3646/
Posted by: Kate | June 1, 2008, 11:31 pm 11:31 pm
I once liked and respected Hilary Clinton, but no more. She has shown that she is willing to cheat and be completely unfair in order to try to win. To say that Obama should not receive any delegates from Michigan but that she should receive all of hers is just ridiculous. The votes weren’t even supposed to count!!! Which by the way, she agreed to with no problem when she thought she had the nomination in hand. Now she is willing to say and do anything to try to win. I just can’t respect anyone that will try to manipulate and scheme their way into winning.
Posted by: Lynn | June 1, 2008, 11:36 pm 11:36 pm
I’m a Floridian and that study is a joke. They complicate the issue by comparing Dem and Repub turnout (do they adjust after each candidate drops). And they include states with differing primary systems. And they add to the mix the 2004 results.
I posted a diary on this at MyDD with the math showing that it doesn’t make sense.
From that diary (this is closed primary states):
Average Dem Turnout 40.74%
Median Dem Turnout 41.75%
Florida Dem Turnout 42.30%
Average Repub Turnout 34.84%
Median Repub Turnout 36.08%
Florida Repub Turnout 50.96%
So while the Florida Dem turnout was slightly better than average, the Florida Repub turnout was much better than average. In fact, the only state that had a higher Repub turnout was Arizona, McCain’s state.
…
They believe 2.85 million Florida Democratic voters should have turned out to vote. That’s a lot of voters. In fact that is a 68.89% voter turnout.
Let’s look at that with the other closed primary states.
Average Dem Turnout 40.74%
Median Dem Turnout 41.75%
Actual Florida Dem Turnout 42.30%
Projected Florida Dem Turnout based on Repub Turnout 68.89%
That would put Florida way ahead of every other closed primary state. The next closest would be Connecticut with 51.09%. Does this seem reasonable? For a primary?
Posted by: Step Beyond | June 2, 2008, 12:30 am 12:30 am
Florida voted. Almost 2M Democrats showed up to vote. Historic turnout. Obama ran hundreds of political ads in the week of the election. Hundreds! Intent is he was running in the Florida primary.
Stop the whining. Obama lost. H. will. never. win. Florida. I suggest you OBs move on.
By the way, best election ever. No paper filling up the mail box. No continuous ads except Obamas. No people with signs at the polls and getting in the way.
Most pleasant election I ever voted in.
Posted by: Madelyn110 | June 2, 2008, 12:37 am 12:37 am
I am extremely disappointed with Mr. Obama. I wanted to like him, but even more important, at this point I don’t trust him. I believe he is what was once described as a “social climber” whose raw ambition causes him to talk down to Americans with his flowery speech, and who has a track record of being more interested in identifying with the “in crowd” (Exelon, oil companies, watered down legislation for cronies, unethical campaign practices in 1996, using lobbyists until a month ago while pretending not to, etc., than he is with improving the safety and quality of life for ALL Americans. I am truly afraid for the country because I believe he is insincere and extremely self centered. I do not identify him with FDR or JFK who both went out on big limbs to care for their country. I am so disappointed.
Now we are stuck with a clever politician who has a track record of deviousness and deceit and whose ego knows no boundaries. The truth is, I don’t want to vote at all at this point, and that is the saddest place to be in that I can think of. I wonder how many others feel this way. There is no good candidate running for office.
Posted by: AnnD | June 2, 2008, 1:01 am 1:01 am
Kate, please enlighten me as to how you expect us to believe that on the one hand Donald Rumsfeld gave Iraq WMDs. Then on the other hand, when George Tenet briefs President Bush on the intelligence from an Iraqi foreign minister that Iraq does not have WMDs, President Bush is supposed to believe the latter when he apparently knows “for a fact” that we and the UK gave Iraq WMDs? And when President Bush “dismissed” the latter for what he “knows for a fact,” all of a sudden he is lying? It sounds like you are trying to have your cake and eat it too.
Posted by: James Danley | June 2, 2008, 2:22 am 2:22 am
Bob4USA,
History will only repeat itself if Hillary Clinton keeps tearing Obama done if she keep up with this there will be no where else to cast the blame..
Its time to move forward with Obama and Unite behind him as you said it will be the poor and middle class that will suffer if we dont !
obama 08 12
Posted by: Kate | June 2, 2008, 2:23 am 2:23 am
James Danlely
Come on now there all facts of history.. We had people inside every level of the Iraqi government… We really new everything he was up to.
Remember Iraqi Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf he was working for MI6 (UK version of CIA).
Every wonder why some folks had to be killed yet other higher ups got big pay checks and to leave Iraq and live in Paris, London and United States ?
Do you read alot Danlely ?
Posted by: Kate | June 2, 2008, 2:38 am 2:38 am
Kate. You obviously didn’t understand my post. Obama did not win any major swing states and did not win the popular vote just like fellow Democrat McGovern in 1972. Republican Nixon won 49 states in the G/E 520 electoral votes McGovern won 1 state 17 elctoral votes. If Obama is the nominee the same embarrassing loss will happen again. McCain will win by similar numbers.
Posted by: Bob4USA | June 2, 2008, 2:45 am 2:45 am
James Danley
History we gave Iraq the knollage and components for the wmds then he used them on Iran and the kurds we then sent in the CIA and CDC folk to study the effectivness of the WMDS it all publicly available information. gave Iraq information and Intel on how to beat Iran in there war.. At the same time we gave Iran weapons and Intel on Iraq “Iran contra”
We then told Sadam he could invade Saudi Arabia when he did we put together the Coalition for the first golf war. Saudi Arabia was then idebted to us for there rescue and sold us cheap oil. We sold them arms.
After Iraqs defeat we then orginised weapon inspection to find the equipment and remaining WMDs we sold him. We then kept the no fly zone to keep him in check. We let him sell oil below market value under the oil for food program.
Then we Sadam decided to cut deals with non US and UK nations under the oil for food program mostly through france and germany and china. We could stand the so we went in search of wmds again.. We then went to war out side the un with and invaded the country so all the oil was ours. We didnt want to share how dear all these other countries profit of our deception and effort.
Now we are bogged down in a war paid for by the American people to insure US and UK oil companies have control of that oil.
3.3trillion could have invented an new form of fuel.
But oil comapnies dont profit from that!
Posted by: Kate | June 2, 2008, 3:11 am 3:11 am
Kate, you still haven’t answered my question:
How is it that President Bush lied about Saddam Hussein having WMDs? You have admitted that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. But then you sighted a briefing that George Tenent gave that said there were no WMDs as your proof that President Bush lied.
Actually it wasn’t until AFTER we went into Iraq that we proved that Saddam Hussein no longer had WMDs. That was all the UN Security Council had demanded since 1991 — one of the several conditions for the 1991 Gulf War cease fire to which Saddam Hussein agreed, but never complied. Had we not invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein would still be in power; his neighbors would still think he had WMDs; he would still be raking in billions of dollars through the oil-for-food fiasco; hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would have been tortured, raped and killed; and many more Palestinian families would have received up to $25,000 as a reward for a member of their family killing innocent Israelis in suicide bombings.
Posted by: James Danley | June 2, 2008, 10:40 am 10:40 am
I am a Florida resident who did not vote because I follow the news and knew it wasn’t going to count. I am an independent who would have had to re-register, which I was planning to do in order to vote for Obama.
People like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz are disingenuous when they claim that on the one hand, Florida voters couldn’t be expected to know about the disqualification, yet on the other hand, they knew plenty about Obama in January to make it a fair election despite no campaigning.
Posted by: MarcV | June 2, 2008, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Why have all of my comments been removed. They were reasonable, well written, contained references, and without profanity.
Posted by: Cd1234567891 | June 3, 2008, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm