Dean Urges Do-Over Voting in Fla., Mich.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: The Huffington Post

WASHINGTON — Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean urged Florida and Michigan party officials to come up with plans to repeat their presidential nominating contests so that their delegates can be counted.

"All they have to do is come before us with rules that fit into what they agreed to a year and a half ago, and then they'll be seated," Dean said during a round of interviews Thursday on network and cable TV news programs.

The two state parties will have to find the funds to pay for new contests without help from the national party, Dean said.

"We can't afford to do that. That's not our problem. We need our money to win the presidential race," he said.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/06/dean-urges-doover-voting_n_90199.html

[Earth_First]

1. I say Obama & Hillary split the bill 50/50

I'd even donate again (to both parties) under these circumstances...

[JBoy]

2. Would be cheaper to just split the delegates 50/50. n/t

[Earth_First]

5. Would it?

To be honest, I've never seen the numbers as to what it would cost to run the elections over again.

Anyone have a link?

[movonne]

7. That's what I think would be fair...not pouring more money into

this election...and again expecting us to finance it...as suggested in a post above to give more money to the candidates...

[Tarc]

12. Never going to happen, but if they split the delegates 50/50, what would be the point?

It'd just increase the delegate count of both without an advantage or gain to either, and would not reflect the will of the voters at all.

Obama got beaten twice in the original voting and he will get thumped severely if there is a do-over, and it is kinda hard for him to go back to two states that he wanted to disenfranchise asking for votes.

[Zhade]

51. To stop Clinton's attempt to cheat.

NT!

[SteppingRazor]

3. That last point is what's going to scuttle this.

The state party certainly doesn't have the money to fund a new primary or caucus. Dean says the DNC won't do it, and Gov. Crist has said Florida won't do it.

So, who's paying for this?

[smiley_glad_hands]

4. Exactly, so that makes all this euphoria in HRC's camp moot.

She can't overtake Obama. She needs to drop out. Now.

[greyghost]

56. Yeah right! I'll let her know. ROFLMAO!

[kattenstoet]

6. Why not just have them campaign like there will be a primary

and then allocate the votes according to a Survey USA poll - they've been pretty accurate so far, and the difference between their polls and the actual vote would only amount to a few delegates at most.

It would be a lot cheaper....

[wryter2000]

10. Welcome to DU

:hi:

[Bill McBlueState]

38. that's an interesting idea

But people are highly unwilling to trust anything that uses statistical sampling. There will be a sense that only people who got polled were able to vote.

[robcon]

8. Good idea.

Dr. Dean has it right this time.

[Captain Hilts]

9. Florida already had a primary, with 2m voters, in which all candidates were on the ballot. nt

[libbygurl]

13. Good point. nt

[Stuckinthebush]

15. The problem was that it was known that those results would not count

How many stayed home? Probably quite a few. The results are not an accurate reflection of the voters' will.

[Captain Hilts]

19. Hard to say. But you have to be gentle with two million folks. Especially in Florida...nt

[Stuckinthebush]

22. Perhaps

I still don't know why Florida chose to go against the DNC calendar knowing that it would end up like this. I guess the state GOP was excited about the possibility of playing havoc with the Dem process.

[IronLionZion]

25. Republicans did this to us

in their state legislature. The Dems didn't have much of a choice in Florida.

Michigan was Dem all the way. They felt their dire economic situation would justify it.

[Stuckinthebush]

31. And now Crist is trying to make it look like the Dems are terrible

the bastards.

[Dr.Phool]

35. Yeah, that "Republican", who was a Democrat, who introduced the bill.

And all those "Republicans" who were Democrats who ALL except one (who did it as a joke) that voted to pass the goddamned bill. The Democrats in the Florida Legislature, said "We're too important", fuck the rules, and fuck the rest of the country, we're jumping ahead of everyone.

I, for one voted in that election, knowing my preidential vote was moot, but I voted for Edwards anyway. But more important, there was a property tax amendment on the ballot. That's why most of us voted.

[IronLionZion]

44. those bastards

what were they thinking? Let's lose the election in November?

[Zhade]

53. Tough. The voters should have lobbied those who agreed to the rules beforehand.

NT!

[Deep13]

16. true nt

[krispos42]

36. And the problem with that is....

Neither candidate campaigned there, so the information voters were basing their information on was less than in other states. And many voters knew it wouldn't count and stayed home.

It's a fact that back when the primary was done, back in January IIRC, the voters in Florida were running basically on name recognition. This was before the media blitz of the Obama multi-state victories dominated the news and media, so Hillary dominated the conciousness of the voters.

The vote should be re-done. They've been punished enough for jumping the gun in violation of DNC rules. National embarassment, plenty of "of course, it's Florida" eye-rolling, etc.

They should do caucuses, which I believe are pretty damn cheap. They can even do them in a park or something. It's warm down there, unlike Iowa

[harmonicon]

40. not really

it was a primary for fools - how many people didn't vote because they knew the primary was a sham and no delegates would be assigned from it?

[JPZenger]

42. Most people showed up for a tax referendum

My understanding is that most people showed up at the Florida primary because of a tax referendum.

[skooooo]

11. Caucus will be the only affordable, short-notice possibility....

I don't think they'll have the funds to have a ballot primary.

[Captain Hilts]

20. In Florida, where there is a huge percentage of elderly & spanish langvoters, caucuses won't work...

The caucus process discourages participation by:

elderly
elderly women, in particular
people for whom English is a second language
working people with kids

They also make women more vulnerable to pressure by husbands.

[skooooo]

21. This isn't a discussion of which you like, or think is fair..

...it will come down to what they can afford. That's all I'm saying.

[Captain Hilts]

23. Eight years in polling has had me on this stump since '96. nt

[dflprincess]

30. Make women more vlunerable to pressure by husbands?

In all the years I've been going to caucuses - and what I've seen in my own family - in cases where one spouse appears to be pressuring the other, it's the women laying the law down to their husbands. And I'm talking about all age groups.

[Captain Hilts]

37. Perhaps in your 'hood. But this is why absentee ballot voting is not being ...

encouraged nationally. It's not a secret ballot. People vote differently with a secret ballot.

Women do not engage in bargaining behavior nearly as often as men. So, women that would attend a caucus are a specific demographic of women that does not accurately reflect the voting population that turns out to vote on a Tuesday. For example, men are 8 time more likely to ask for a pay raise than women are. And they bargain for higher starting salaries than womendo. This is why Saturn cars had such a high percentage of female buyers - they were promised 'no bargaining'.

If the national election were a caucus, this would be an alternative. But it isn't. It's about voting in secret on a Tuesday.

[dflprincess]

45. What does bargaining behavior have to do with being influenced by their husbands?

You go to the caucus and support your candidate. There might be some bargaining done if a subcaucus doesn't have enough members to elect at least one delegate, but that isn't the same as buying a car or negotiating a raise.

[9119495]

32. Wrong. See Iowa.

Elderly (men and women) always show up (in friggin' January!)

You do not have to speak at a caucus. Identification in the form of a voter registration form or state drivers license can be matched up with the list. You then can go stand with your group and not say a word, yet still be counted. (This happened in my caucus for a few candidates).

Kids are welcome at the caucus...they just can't vote...but that should be expected.

[Captain Hilts]

46. Different caucuses have different rules. nt

[9119495]

48. Actually most caucuses are exactly like this...

Did you have proof Florida's would be organized differently.

At DU, people tend to make wild assumptions about caucuses.

[LiberalFighter]

28. Have an election using paper ballots to keep votes secret

Conduct it on a Saturday when most people would have the time.

Conduct it at from 1 to 4 locations in each county. There shouldn't be a need to have the preferential primary in each precinct. If they can find locations they don't have to lease so much the better.

Have the hours from about 9AM to 4PM.

Restrict voting to only registered Democrats. (This is a preference nomination by Democrats not Independents or Republicans)

This should reduce any costs of conducting the election.


Voters should not have to be directly influenced by others at the voting site as can be done in caucuses.

[harmonicon]

41. I hope they don't do that

I'm a registered Michigan voter, but live abroad (I can't vote as an american abroad, because I'm over here on a temporary visa). A caucus is no use to me. A primary with a ballot that I could mail in would be great.

[Deep13]

14. Democracy is worth the cost where ever it comes from.

That this is a discussion about money is revolting.

[pahdonky]

18. heres what i dont understand.....

what was the motivation to move michigan up in the primaries?...
i heard rumblings of drawing attention to the plight of michigan and having a say in picking our presidential nominee....this doesnt hold water...
im sure the folks that make these decisions were well aware of the ramifications of such decisions...
they embraced these ramifications for one reason
a new way disenfranchise voters...
if you know anything about michigan politics
you understand that southeast michigan dominates the rest of the state
southeastern michigan is dominated by detroit..
do you know the ethno make up of the detroit area?
are you following me here?
after committing to not campaigning in michigan....
hillary is on the ballot....
you do the math....
something doesnt add up....
who do you think the voters in southeastern michigan would have turned out to support?

[Deep13]

24. Four years ago it was essentially over after Iowa.

Voters didn't know who would be best and when Kerry won Iowa, every just kind of latched onto him. Later we had buyer's remorse, but it was too late. Michigan and FL were looking at steering the race toward an electable candidate, not to get getting delegates.

I think the Midwestern states generally wanted to have some say in the nomination to insure an electable candidate in the fall. They didn't want to be stuck with an unelectable North-Eastern liberal that would be unacceptable to the rest of the county like Kerry, Dukakis or, um, Hillary Clinton. In '04, two of the leading candidates Dean and Kerry were from New England with Lieberman being from NE too. Edwards was the sole Southerner and Gehpardt the sole Midwesterner. If we had a brain in our heads we would have nominated Gehphardt, but he never had a chance. Norther-Easterners always have an advantage in NH because their people can go there for campaigning and then sleep in their own beds.

[IronLionZion]

27. Revolting as it is, the cost must come from somewhere.

That's the reality of it whether you like it or not. Would you throw in some money for it?

What would this discussion be about exactly? If cost wasn't a factor, there would be no discussion because they would simply redo the election because it's the right thing to do.

[Deep13]

29. "Would you throw in some money for it?"

Sure, why not?

[IronLionZion]

33. Good, because the cost is the only issue/topic for discussion in this case.

I don't know what else there is to talk about for this situation.

[Zhade]

52. Well, we could discuss how changing the rules mid-contest to favor the losing candidate is cheating.

NT!

[9119495]

34. Yes...all states should be able to revote. I mean if Edwards had

quit before New Hampshire, Obama would have won there. LET'S REVOTE IN ALL STATES THAT HAD CANDIDATES ON THE BALLOT NO LONGER IN THE RACE. Only then will we have a truly democratic election.

[Zhade]

54. Hey, if we're going to throw out SOME rules, might as well throw them all out, right?

I can't believe all this talk of cheating disguised as "enfranchisement". It's not like people didn't know the vote wouldn't count.

[9119495]

60. And before we go any further...let's agree that Florida and Michigan

should go dead last next time. Their elections might mattter a great deal...they might be totally irrelevant, but that should be a reasonable precondition for negotiations.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

17. It's really the only proper thing to do.

I can (almost) see seating the Florida delegates, but the idea of seating the Michigan delegates as they stand right now is preposterous and simply unacceptable. I would view such a move as a bald-faced attempt by Hillary Clinton to steal an election. :mad:

Dean has it right.

[BluWtrLynn]

26. I would donate.

I would donate to the FL & MI parties to support a re-vote or caucus in those states. Whoever the nominee becomes, they do not need this taint. If I had my wish however, the super-delegates from those states would be excluded from the first count at the convention. They are, for the most part, the horses a**es who got us into this mess.

[0rganism]

39. How much does it cost to hold caucuses?

Redoing a full primary election would be unreasonable, in both expense and burden on state governments which have already done their share. So that leaves caucuses. What expense is required, other than that of renting several hundred venues for an evening?

[ybbor]

43. Here's my question...

Now if MI holds a do-over, will anyone be allowed to vote?

In MI you could vote either Dem or Rep not both. Seeing as "both" parties held a primary that day, Repubs voted for their guy, and as Kos suggested, a lot of Dems voted for Romney instead of in their own race.

I can see a whole slew of dittoheads showing up to vote for Hillary because Oxyboy told them to do so. This could skew the results. As a Michigander myself (who chose to vote for Kucinich), I think that neither states votes should count. All the candidates were aware of the situation when the day began, and now Hillary wants her way or shes not going to take her ball and go home! Obama was not on the ballot in MI, and neither of them campaigned here or in Fla.

[Zhade]

55. Indeed. Neither state's votes should count BECAUSE THAT'S THE RULE THEY KNEW GOING INTO IT.

Changing it now is cheating. It sucks for the FL/MI voters, but if we just throw out the rules again, this election's an even bigger joke.

[sarcasmo]

47. Michigan can't afford this to happen, plain and simple. The party won't pay for the do over.

[ozone_man]

57. Caucus is cheaper.

That's what I hear Michigan is thinking about. Makes sense to me.

[pegleg]

49. No more flip flop

[HockeyMom]

50. Throw them both out

I voted in Florida. What a "wonderful" state.

[tom_paine]

58. Et tu, Howard? n/t

[ngant17]

59. This issue was settled in Aug 07

August 2007 New York Times

Democrats Take a Tough Line on Florida Primary

The Democratic National Committee, threatening to take the toughest line possible, voted Saturday to refuse to seat any Florida Democrat at the Democratic presidential convention in 2008 if the state party did not delay the date of its 2008 primary to conform to the party's nominating calendar.

The committee gave Florida Democrats 30 days to propose a primary date that conformed with Democratic rules prohibiting all but four states from holding their primaries or caucuses before Feb. 5. But Florida leaders, who seemed stunned by a near-unanimous vote and the severity of the punishment, said they were doubtful they could come up with an alternative.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I'm NPA, so I don't see why the Dems in Florida should have two primaries for themselves in a year. So the last round of votes will be declared null and void and you are forced to vote until you get it right, according to what Sen. Nelson and the other Hillary supporters in Florida want.

If the Florida Dems can have 2 primaries a year, why can't they let all the other marginal parties (Libertarian, Socialist, Communist, Green, ect) get free advertising in the newspapers and have their own primary at least once every election year? Why stop at 2? Why are the Dems so special in Florida anyway? The most wonderful thing about political parties is that there are so many to pick from.