Democratic Catastrophe in Florida and Michigan – Follow-up and Better Solution

[stevenleser]

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080208_democratic_catastrop.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 8, 2008
By Steven Leser


Yesterday, I wrote about how Florida and Michigan Democrats were punished by the DNC for moving up their respective primaries by having their ability to seat delegates at the convention taken away from them http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080207_democrats_the_dnc_an.htm . In short, this means Florida and Michigan Democrats have no say into who is the Democratic nominee for President.


I blamed the DNC (Democratic National Committee) and Howard Dean exclusively and it appears that this isn’t the complete story. Someone wrote to me to explain that Florida’s State Democratic Party, in particular, voted 115-1 to authorize the Florida state legislature (mostly Republicans) to move up their primary date in defiance of repeated warnings by the DNC.


Regardless of who is at fault, grassroots Democrats in Florida and Michigan are not at fault and they deserve to have a voice in who represents them in the general election despite what the state party operatives did or did not do. My initial suggestion was to do the same as what the RNC did when they punished the Florida Republicans, which is to seat half of the delegates voted for in the Florida primary.


The problem with this solution is that Florida Republicans knew that they were voting for real delegates and candidates for the Republican nomination were permitted to campaign in Florida. Florida Republicans got the chance to see and get to know those for whom they had a chance to vote. Not so with the Democrats. The DNC put into effect a ban on campaigning in Florida for those vying for the Democratic nomination. In the absence of any campaigning, the person with the greatest initial name recognition, Hillary Clinton, easily got more votes than anyone else in Florida. In Michigan, she was the only one who put her name on the ballot since it was told to everyone that the match up there would be only a ‘beauty contest’.


Moving to the present, now that there is a real horse race for the Democratic nomination, Hillary and her campaign want to have the delegates from Michigan and Florida retroactively recognized and seated at the convention. They are trying to make this into something that they are supposedly doing to benefit the voters of both states. The self serving nature of this effort by campaign Clinton is disturbing and detestable.


The article that I wrote yesterday where I suggested that half the delegates from Florida and Michigan be seated at the convention drew a lot of responses both privately to me and on the various sites it was posted. Of all of the solutions proposed, there is only one that seems to make everyone happy and is the most fair and it is not the one I proposed yesterday. That solution is to have new Democratic Party caucuses in both states during the April-June timeframe.


Coincidentally as the responses were coming in and I was coming to this realization, I found out that Michigan Democrats do indeed seem on their way to doing this. This effort should be supported by everyone. It is Florida where there is a problem. Several prominent Florida Democrats, including one of my favorites, Senator Bill Nelson, whose campaign I worked on in 2000 when he first got elected, object to the idea of a new Florida Caucus. The objection is that the Florida state Democratic Party would have to pay for it and they do not have the money. I hope that is the reason. I hope the fact that Senator Nelson and many Florida state Democratic operatives are supporters of Hillary’s campaign has nothing to do with any possible decision and objections.

The DNC and Florida’s State Democratic Party need to remember that there will be a general election in November. Anything they can do to re-energize the Democratic base in the state of Florida isn’t only a good idea; it may be the only thing that will keep Florida in play for the Democrats. If Florida isn’t in play, McCain will be free to spend more campaign money on other swing states like New Mexico, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, etc. If it means the DNC and Florida State Democratic Party need to come to an agreement about sharing costs for this caucus, then they need to do that. We all need to get together on the one solution that will be fair and everyone can feel good about. We need a new Democratic caucus in Florida.



Authors Bio: Steven Leser specializes in Politics, Science & Health, and Entertainment topics. He has held positions within the Democratic Party including District Chair and Public Relations Chair within county organizations. Mr. Leser broke the story of the Bush Impeachment Resolution being drafted in the Illinois General Assembly. The story was printed right here on OpEdNews.com

[zanne]

1. What do you suggest we do about the cause of all this?

What caused this problem was that Michigan and Florida said to hell with the rules and went ahead and scheduled their primaries before the first-in-the-nation state. They KNEW, going in, that they weren't supposed to do that, but they figured they'd do it anyway and then try to wriggle out of accepting any consequences.
It's fine to start planning for a different first-in-the-nation state NOW, so it can be done the right way in four years, but it's not right to let these two states get away with what they've done. Remember; you have to blame the states because they knew that what they were doing was wrong in the first place.

[stevenleser]

2. Well, if you think about it, they didnt get away with it...

they wanted to be first in the nation to have an effect on the nomination and it didnt work. A new caucus at the end would cement the failure of that idea, as a matter of fact. If all it affected was the state operatives in both Michigan and Florida, I would say to hell with them.

Obama folks, of which I am one, need to remember that the credentials committee at the convention could choose to reseat the existing delegates if they choose. It is within their power to do so. It would rend the party in two and make it impossible for the victor to then win the election, so it is also in Hillary's folks best interests to not allow that to happen.

I agree with you though, it is immediately after a general that states should get together with the DNC to come up with a better process. I have one in mind that I am saving to put into an article right after the election.

[zanne]

61. But what about the next time?

Will we have to through this every four years? I live in NH and that's all people were talking about for months! Augh!

[stevenleser]

63. We have to reform the process...

... I have a lengthy article on how I think we should do that but I am trying to save it for after the general election so no one can accuse me of sour grapes re: the nomination.

[zanne]

65. If we're to change the first-in-the-nation state...

The process has to begin very shortly after the primaries to ensure that we all play by the rules.

[stevenleser]

69. We're in violent agreement here...

;-)

[zanne]

75. heh. nt

[Pathwalker]

3. Michigan Republicans will not allow this to happen.

Unless you get Lansing, Michigan-the State's Capitol-local television, you probably don't realize that the State's Republicans have been quite vocal over any possibility of either a caucus or primary "do over". They insist that Michigan law only allows for either one caucus or one primary per election year, and that in order for another one of either to allowed, this law would have to be overturned. The Republican State legislators have repeatedly, and loudly announced that they will fight this effort "tooth-and-nail, and with every fiber of their being.
They are quite adamant that not one red cent of Michigan money, nor one piece of voting equipment will be allowed to be used for this purpose. They are fully united in this effort, and spend much air time mocking the State Democrats AND the DNC as being bloody hypocrites when they state that they care about the voice of the voters. Anyone who thinks the Republican machine in this state will fail in their efforts, doesn't know Michigan politics. Period.
It won't happen, here. End of story. It's OVER.

[stevenleser]

5. I dont think Michigan law can stop what is essentially a local chapter of a national and private...

organization from meeting and electing leaders. Senator Bill Nelson, who I mentioned in my article, tried to have Florida's delegates reseated in a lawsuit that mentioned a number of things that I think overlap here. The decision basically said that the DNC can make the rules on how its organization does things and the parties of individual states can be punished if they do not adhere to its rules.

If you look at that in its contrapositive, then the parties of individual states are permitted to follow the directions of the DNC in selecting delegates. I dont think Michigan Republicans have a leg to stand on. Now, it may be that the Michigan state Democratic party and the DNC would have to pay for all of it, but that is another story.

[Pathwalker]

9. Do you have ANY idea how strong the Republican machine is

in this state? Seriously?

[Big Blue Marble]

12. There is a simple way around the Republicans.

Assuming it does not violate any Michigan laws,the DNC pays completely for the caucus.

They have a special fundraising effort around the country to raise the funds. If Obama and Hillary can raise
15 million dollars in one day, the DNC can raise the money to help elect their presidential candidate.

I would donate to the cause.

[Pathwalker]

15. It WOULD violate Michigan Law. The law only allows ONE.

The law would have to be changed, and the Republicans have vowed to fight it. Vigorously.

[rhett o rick]

17. Paying for Michigan and Flordia caucus is a slippery slope. The DNC shouldn't make rules

they aren't going to enforce. Florida and Michigan knew what they were doing when they broke the rules.

[Big Blue Marble]

25. I understand the slope argument.

Yet this has become a national issue. It goes beyond Michigan and Florida's behaviors.
No one knew it would come to this.

We must be able nominate a candidate that is fully credible. I do not see how we do that without
including the huge numbers of voters in these two states. And we have to included them in
a way that is fair to both candidates and to their supporters.

Once again, we have hit an election conundrum. It feels all too familiar doesn't it?

[rhett o rick]

28. We have met the enemy and it is us. Day-jaw-view. nm

[zanne]

62. But what happens next time?

This year, we in NH almost had to hold our Primary in December! When will the first-in-the-nation state be voting in four years...September? You can see how that could get way out of hand.

[stevenleser]

36. Who knew. The people of Florida or the operatives?

That is the problem into which this kind of argument keeps running.

[BenDavid]

4. there will be no damn caucuses in either state...

[stevenleser]

6. And your reasoning is...

what?

[cali]

7. That's simple

that poster hates Obama and fears that he might do well if caucuses are held. And yes, I mean hate.

[daleks not included]

24. Do you live in Michigan?

Race has nothing to do with Michigan or Florida. It has alot to do with STATE law.

[samrock]

8. Confused about something..

Did the local democratic party have the option to say the their state legislators ( I am assuming both Michigan and Florida are controlled by the republicans)... ok you want to move your primary up.. well we do not/can't.. Soo we want to do what other states do and have separate primary dates... OR since the money needed to do all the logistics to make that happen have to pass republican controlled legislatures that was not an option..

[stevenleser]

18. They did, yes, and unfortunately....

Florida's Democratic State Party voted 115-1 to move up the primary in flagrant violation of what the DNC warned them not to do.

[samrock]

23. noo my point is

What would have happend IF they had voted no.. Since the Republicans have total say in that state could they have just say.. well F&&& you! we ARE moving it up.. and we will not fund seperate dates.. so THERE!!!

[pampango]

41. Perhaps the DNC would have not sanctioned the state if the state democratic

party had fought the Republicans and voted against the law. If it had passed anyway, it would have been much more unlikely that the DNC would crack down on Florida.

AFAIK, there is not evidence that they put up a fight and certainly no evidence that they voted against the Republicans' plan to move the primary.

[UALRBSofL]

22. If you got the chance to read what Nelson said

He is refusing a caucus. He also reiterated if the delegates are not seated accordingly to the jan 29th primary there could potentially be a delegate sit-out. Then he went on to say without the delegates being seated per the primary there would be many disenfranchised democrats and it could cause a lower turnout due to the fact the candidate people voted for didn't get the nomination because of the loss of florida delegates. I don't have a link but someone posted it on a thread yesterday.

[flyarm]

37. Nelson and his DLC buddies already disenfranchised many dems in the state of Fla..

most were told their vote would not count and many many did not vote on Jan 29th.

Many people just stayed home because the news media kept reiterating ..the vote didn't count..in fact it was 99% all repug news here..on super Tuesday many dems showed up to vote on the East coast because they didn't realize the Dem vote was on Jan 29th!

Nelson needs to take a shit load of blame for that!!He and his DLC did a real number on this states voters and dems!

fly

[flyarm]

34. Dems in Fla state legislature voted to change the election date knowing damn well

they were breaking the rules..and it was pointed out to those dems loud and clear by the DNC....the DLC was behind it all in Fla .

they knew what they were doing ..it would not have passed if the dems had voted no.

fly

[Coexist]

10. A-men - and can someone with an OpEd account

please let me Lesser know that the DNC offered the FDP $800,000 to run a caucus?

[stevenleser]

19. I got it, I am here.

Feel free to email me at [e-mail] with any more info. that goes for anyone here.

[Coexist]

26. have you read madfloridian's journal?

lots of links/details. really everything you need to know. check the front page.

[stevenleser]

29. He is the one I mentioned in my article that set me straight

on a few things...

[seafan]

11. I am in favor of a Florida caucus.

Here are the facts as I understand them:


1. The DNC/FL Democratic Party/FL Legislature bear responsibility for this invalid delegate debacle.

2. None of this is the fault of the voters.

3. As a result, the candidates have not campaigned in Florida and the voters have not had the opportunity to see/hear from these candidates as the other states have.

4. When voters here were told that our delegates would not count toward naming a nominee, untold numbers of voters did not participate, thereby disenfranchising them. After what happened in 2000, we know disenfranchisement when we see it.

5. For Senator Clinton to claim these previously declared invalid delegates, after taking advantage of her early name recognition on a ballot without the voters seeing/hearing from the candidates in this race because they were barred from campaigning in our state, is unacceptable.

6. These delegates are, indeed, invalid for that reason, notwithstanding the DNC's early pronouncement as well.




Holding a caucus is less expensive than holding a primary. Somehow, the DNC/FL Democratic Party/FL Legislature need to foot the bill for a Florida caucus. It is the only way to ensure that the voters here will see and hear from the candidates directly, make their decisions, and vote.

It is the only fair way to solve the problem.


This will go a long way toward keeping the decision out of the hands of wild card superdelegates, who could ultimately ignore the will of the voters of Florida. We need to avoid this abyss, whatever we do.


Holding a Florida caucus is FAIR to all involved, most especially the VOTERS.

[samrock]

13. Uh

You think the republican legeslators will pay to help the democrats get their paw out of this trap??? Bwhahahahaha!!!!!!

[flyarm]

44. the National DNC offered that to Fla long before the Jan 29th election ..

the FDP turned it down..flat assed down.

fly

[K Gardner]

14. Wow.. wish I could rec THIS. Concise and coherent. Much thanks !

[Big Blue Marble]

16. I think new caucuses in Michigan and Florida are imperative now.

We must have a legitimate nominee and it is the only way that is possible.

Otherwise it will leave a taste similar to the 2000 results within our party.

It must be done.

[Pathwalker]

21. It won't. Not in Michigan.

[rhett o rick]

27. No the voters didn't make this mess. Their organizations made the mess. That is the system.

Like it or not the state organizations make lots of decisions that the voters may not like. Without rules there would be chaos. Florida and Michigan Democrat organizations were trying to be cute and violate the rules. If the voters don't like that they need to punish their organizations and/or try to change the rules.

The national party isn't blameless. We have a horribly stupid system. In Wash the state we have a primary that the Democrats totally ignore. Stupid. We all have a super-delegate system to make sure that those in the party machine have a significant voice in what happens in spite of the grassroots members. Stupid.

Paying for caucuses in Florida and Michigan at this point would be saying we are sorry we punished you for clearly breaking the rules just for selfish purposes and now we want to make it up to you. Stupid.

[stevenleser]

38. None of that is any reason not to fix the situation to

benefit the grassroots Democrats of Florida and Michigan to give them a say and not turn them off for the general.

[rhett o rick]

73. Yes I agree and I would be more willing to support this if I thought the Democratic

Party would fix it for next time. But I doubt it. It would be easy to fix. No caucuses, primaries laid out by size of the states, smallest states first. No stupid super-delegates. The term super-delegates infuriates me. What the &*^%& is so "super" about them.

[seafan]

60. The problem is that we don't have a clear frontrunner, and the longer that remains true,

the more important Florida's delegates become.


If there were a clear frontrunner, we wouldn't be having this increasing scrutiny and infighting on how it all went down at the DNC/FL Dem Party/FL Legislature level. It would all have been forgotten about.

But since Florida's delegates are very clearly needed, it only puts the embarrassing spotlight back onto those who are responsible for it.


We are faced with two options, and the longer this goes on without attempting to correct this fairly, the worse it will be for the candidates, their supporters and our party leaders in the crucial months before November.


Option 1: Florida is denied a fair caucus. Our neutered delegates are in limbo right up to the convention. Both the candidates are neck and neck in the race. There is a bitter, contentious fight at the convention over whether to reseat Florida's tainted delegates. This will destroy party unity, and encourage secret and smelly backroom deals that will enrage both candidates' supporters, because everyone will know that when the Dem leadership HAD THE CHANCE to remedy this debacle by holding a fair caucus in Florida, they refused. If I were Howard Dean, I would absolutely do everything in my power to prevent this disaster.



Option 2: Florida holds a caucus this spring. The candidates come down and campaign their hearts out for us to see and hear. We vote. We now have legitimate delegates to send to the convention this summer, with the knowledge that they were selected fairly and clearly. Then, on to November.




The Democratic leadership has to suck this one up. Their heavy-handed tactics won out over more reasoned problem solving. The way to restore credibility is at hand.

We need a Florida caucus.

[rhett o rick]

74. See my response above.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4479952&mesg_id=4485519

[flyarm]

39. Not me..my candidate stepped down the day after our Fla election partly because of the results

of the Jan 29th election..there are no re-do's in elections..oh so now will Edwards get to come back and say..well lets do all Super Tuesday over too..since he is getting fucked out of Fla..and Michigan..

this is disenfranchising all the Edwards people...he was viable when we voted..

so now we shit on all those who voted for Edwards on Jan 29th?

fly

[joshcryer]

20. FL and MI, if they were allowed a doover, would not learn their lesson.

And next election season they'd just hold their primaries early again because, hey, they get a doover.

[stevenleser]

30. Who would learn their lesson? The grassroots?

The state democratic operatives? You really want to punish the grassroots Democrats in those states for the actions of the state operatives? And you want to potentially turn off those people for the general election as well?

That does not make sense to me.

[joshcryer]

42. The grassroots would have no motivation to not elect the officials who ruined their vote.

Then next time it comes around they'd ignore party rules. As it stands now people are very pissed off and can potentially expunge those weak Democrats from their state party.

[stevenleser]

55. No, they cannot...

You have to be a member of the county Democratic Executive Committees in order to vote for state party representatives. It is nigh on too late to do that now to have a vote for what you are talking about later this year, and most people dont have clue about doing this in any case.

The more you analyze this, the more it is clear that this situation unecessarily disenfranchises millions of guiltless people. It seems worse every time you try to bring up a point that says those people somehow deserved it.

[pampango]

59. You are right about guiltless people being disenfranchised. That's what make this such

a terrible situation. Either we stick it to Obama or to millions of Florida voters.

If we seat the Florida delegates, Obama will feel double crossed. He is a great campaigner and usually attracts voters when he campaigns in a state. He agreed not to campaign in Florida, because there would not be any delegates awarded. If we renege on the last part of the agreement and award delegates, he and his supporters will not be pleased to say the least. Of course, I guess we could just have a good chuckle that he really believed that our other candidates and the DNC would actually stick to the agreement. Welcome to the world of bare knuckle politics, chump!

That's the conundrum we have to solve.

[stevenleser]

66. I dont think that is the choice before us.

I think if we have new caucuses, Hillary probably wins the Florida one and the Michigan one is up for grabs. Hillary probably gets around 53-55%% of the delegates in Florida and they probably split the Michigan delegates.

How that screws any voters or any candidate, I am not sure.

[pampango]

70. I think caucuses are better than the status quo (primaries would be better,

but maybe impossible), but I think Hillary thinks she's better off trying to keep things the way they are. This way she can keep pushing for the convention to accept primary results that she can't equal with a redo (as you said her percentage goes down in Florida and Michigan is up for grabs) and play the role of defender of the disenfranchised in the meantime.

She and Bill are great campaign strategists, so she must know what's she's doing.

[UALRBSofL]

33. You know the voters didn't make this decision

I can't speak for the whole state of florida but the fact I am a Clinton supporter and I would prefer the primary count and the delegates seated accordingly but I will not be happy if the nominee is decided without the florida delegates. We have a lot of delegates at steak and it change the picture of whom our nominee is.

[stevenleser]

35. And the reality is, I think that...

Hillary probably wins a Florida caucus. It is not as overwhelming as the primary vote was because Barack gets a chance to campaign there. But I still think she wins. there are a lot of transplanted New Yorkers there which is why Giuliani tried the strategy that he did. The problem was that after six or seven straight losses, most people no longer took him seriously.

[joshcryer]

40. Of course the voters didn't make the decision, but Dean's compromise is fair.

The voters get seated, their votes don't count toward the nomination. It's a very fair compromise.

[flyarm]

45. Deans compromise was offered before we had an election in Fla..the Fla Dem party turned him down!

Dean even offered $800,000. to run the caucus..the FDP told him..no......


fly

[stevenleser]

47. Which still disenfranchises Dem voters in FL

from having an impact on who wins the nomination. And the threat looms large over all of us that this results in a fight at the convention over those delegates and/or the credentials committee simply voting to seat them & allow their votes and this resulting in a huge mess that splits the party and elects McCain.

[flyarm]

31. except ..we would be caucusing without those who were on the ballot and running

when we had our election..that being Edwards..that is not right in any way you try to package it.

many of Edwards people stayed home on Jan 29th in Fla because they were told the election had no meaning..as no delegates would be seating to represent them

now that it is a two way race..oh well... so now we fuck the Edwards voters???????

this is nothing but b.s. in my estimation..when our election was run Edwards was a viable candidate.

after Fla he was not..this is not democratic to seat delegates after the fact.We had our election..it is over now.

Maybe this is palatable to Hillary and Obama supporters but it sure as hell is not to me!

fly

[stevenleser]

32. But in the alternatives, Edwards gets nothing either?!?!

I dont understand your logic. Edwards was my guy too until after he dropped out. I completely understand your lamenting the fact that Edwards wont get another chance at it. But preventing people from trying to fix this is not going to help him.

[flyarm]

43. Edwards carried 11 counties on Jan 29th..so what are you saying..those people should be screwed?

by now just two candidates?

people stayed home that could have voted..the election was Jan 29th..why should we have an election re-do when we didn't get that in 2000?

the dem party was offered $800,000.00 to do a caucus long before the Jan 29th election...

they didn't respond to the DNC and finally did in a rude and untimely manner.

EVERYTHING THE fLORIDA DEM PARTY DID FLEW IN THE FACE OF THE RULES AND LAWS GOVERNING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

you want to do something about it..remove the chair of the FDP because she knew damn well what they were doing..remove her for malpractice of party bylaws and rules!

this was a total manipulation of the DLC..and if you pretend otherwise you do not understand Fla politics!

fly a 2004 Dem Delegate for fla

[stevenleser]

46. Great! He got 11 counties...

what does that get us as people who supported him at the time? What does that get him?

Do you want to take a guess as to what Edwards' take on this would be? I dont think there is any question but that he would support a new caucus.

[flyarm]

50. you caucus now that means my vote didn't count..period ..end of story. eom

[UALRBSofL]

52. The bottom line is

Disallow the votes, disallow the delegates. I'm sure the state will turn red with these actions. There is pretty much an equal split of republicans and democrats here in florida. The question is, can a democrat win the GE without florida? I don't know.

[stevenleser]

64. A democrat can definitely NOT win the GE if the race in Florida

is non competitive in favor of the GOP candidate. Then McCain can use whatever cash he has to concentrate on New Mexico, Ohio, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania.

I dont care who our nominee is, we cannot win in that scenario.

[flyarm]

48. there was every opportunity to fix this prior to the election the DLC and the FDP had no

interest in fixing it..this was a ploy ..this was a deliberate manipulation.

so why now after the FDP and certain people gamed the system why should the vote we had ..that the FDP fought for..get thrown out??????????

bullshit..so next time/..what will that manipulation be???????? and for who?????????

fly

[stevenleser]

49. So that the people of Florida who are guiltless, have the

opportunity to vote to have an impact on who the nominee is.

[flyarm]

51. they had that opportunity Jan 29th in a legal election that was fought for by the Democratic party

of Florida..

end of story..

fly

[stevenleser]

53. Oh no, it isnt the end of story by a longshot...

... I'm glad it isnt up to you.

[kentuck]

54. There is one major difference between MI and FL...

The only candidate on the ballot in Michigan was Hillary Clinton. All the candidates were on the ballot in Florida. So the Democrats that went to the poll and only found one name to vote for should have a second chance to vote. In Florida, they had that chance.

[Pathwalker]

56. Kucinich and Dodd were also on my ballot.

She wasn't the ONLY candidate.

[kentuck]

58. But Edwards and Obama were missing?

Do you think that was a true reflection of the will of the people?

[stevenleser]

57. OK, so, lets prevent Hillary from making any campaign

appearances in any future states, have her run only national ads and lets see how well she does vs Barack campaigning in all of those states. Then we can see what " they had that chance " means.

[flyarm]

71. Cleaning up Dean's big mess A Times Editorial

http://www.sptimes.com/2008/02/08/Opinion/Cleaning_up_Dean_s_bi.shtml

snip:

One option that would be fundamentally unfair: allocating Florida's delegates based on the Jan. 29 vote to enable Hillary Clinton to win the nomination. That would be like the Tampa Bay Buccaneers deciding after the regular season they wanted to count a win in a preseason game so they could make the playoffs.

It was a nice gesture by Clinton to promise - after the state's polls closed and she clearly had won the most delegates - to seat Florida's delegation at the national convention. Barack Obama, whom we recommended in the primary, should do the same. But this is a graceful way to unite the party only if the nomination already is decided and Florida's delegates would not change the outcome.



snip:

We were among the many voices who argued before the primary election that the national party should have made the primary votes of Florida Democrats count. We begged Clinton and Obama (and Edwards and the rest) to campaign here. Dean and the candidate(s) refused to listen and treated this state as if it were invisible. So no one can argue with a straight face that the votes the Democrats would not recognize on election day now should decide the Democratic nomination.


If the election had counted, Clinton and Obama edit to add:(and Edwards, and Kucinich, and Biden, and Richardson) would have campaigned here. Even more Democrats would have gone to the polls. The outcome might have been different, or the delegate count might have been closer. We will never know.

[workinclasszero]

67. Proof

It kills me that the same people cryin disenfranchisement are the same people 100% against holding caucuses in Michigan and Florida!:eyes:

Its proof that they are liars and cheats!:puke:

[stevenleser]

68. And they dont seem to get that it is in their best interests too...

... Hillary people need to understand this. There is NO POSSIBLE WAY they win the general election if they reseat these Michigan and Florida Delegates as is. Not only would it turn off far too many Obama supporters, you have to know that this would become the defining event and issue of the election. If you think McCain and the GOP would not seize on this, you are crazy. So, we have millions of Obama supporters who would probably stay home, and we have McCain and the GOP seizing on this as evidence that Hillary and the Democrats are corrupt.

We would probably be lucky not to lose the congress.

[workinclasszero]

72. Totally agree with you

***There is NO POSSIBLE WAY they win the general election if they reseat these Michigan and Florida Delegates as is. Not only would it turn off far too many Obama supporters, you have to know that this would become the defining event and issue of the election.***

Glad I'm not the only one who can see this.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

76. Seat the MI delegates, but strip the Michigan Super delegates out.

Granholm, Cherry, Stabenow, Dingell,.... Conyers too, All of them, strip them out.