Florida Rep. and Hillary supporter says chances of a re-vote are "slim to none" ... link

[Steeler1623]

I think this lady's status as a Clinton campaign co-chair is even more important than her status as a Florida representative as far as seeing whether a re-vote will occur. The Hillary camp apparently doesn't want one, and neither does Obama's campaign I expect.

I expect Hillary's thinking is that since she needs superdelegates to win anyway, she'd rather keep the "bird in the hand" of
her 17 point win and argue before superdelegates at the convention that only she can win that key state. If she goes to a revote she takes the risk that Obama will campaign there for weeks and win voters over with his charm like he did in Texas.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5igrYLRrHG3P6lIbs2E7pSH0bxhvgD8V8PU3G0

But Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz says another election would be too expensive.

"The potential of a do-over is slim to none," said Wasserman Schultz, a national co-chair of Clinton's campaign. "The cost of a do-over is beyond reach. A do-over would be unfair. We still have nerves that are very raw from the 2000 recount in Florida."

[Lucinda]

1. I think it was jenmito yesterday who poasted about a mail-in vote.

Seems like a fine idea to me.

[Steeler1623]

2. But the point is that any revote is a question mark- Hillary looks at the past result

as a done deal that she can spin before the superdelegates.

[Lucinda]

3. No. Hillary looks at the past vote as a done deal and knows it will cost money to

campaign in Florida and MI. So she's advocating for seating the delegates.

If Obama thinks he can make ground over the 40% uncommitted delegates in MI and his Florida numbers, he'll advocate for re-voting. I don't think anyone cam make the case for a caucus because it will be portrayed, correctly, as unfair to Cliton's demographics.

I think we'll have a decision after the next three primaries.

[BattyDem]

4. "A do-over would be unfair"

So ... how is it fair to tell people that their votes wouldn't count and then, months later, count those votes anyway? :shrug:

"We still have nerves that are very raw from the 2000 recount in Florida."

So does the entire country! Once again, Florida is messing things up for the rest of us ... and that's not fair either.

I don't know what the answer to this is. The Dem leadership in Florida f*cked up and the voters are paying the price. Of course, that's not fair. No one wants to pay for another primary, but the results of the original primary can't possibly be used because half of the Democratic party is going to be seriously pissed off. It's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.

Here's my two cents worth ...
Split them 50/50 and strip the superdelegates of their votes as punishment for this mess. Since Obama's name was actually on the ballot in Florida, I would even go for 51/49 in favor of Hillary ... even though I don't think it's fair because he never had the opportunity to campaign there. At this point, we just have to settle this because it's going to split the party in half. (Frankly, I would prefer a do-over in both states ... but if we can't have that, I'll settle for this kind of solution.)

As far as Michigan goes ... it has to be 50/50 because his name wasn't even on the ballot! It blows my mind that Hillary Clinton keeps saying she "won" Michigan. She didn't win anything ... voters didn't have a choice! They couldn't even write anyone else's name in. That's not the way democracy works and a person who wants to be president of this country should not accept those results as a "win" - that's just plain wrong. :-(

Florida DUers ... what's the mood in your state? Do the people want a do-over? Would they accept an even split of the delegates?