I don't see that it will make much of a difference: MI & FL

[rateyes]

If there are re-dos on the elections in MI & FL, the number to secure the nomination will increase by half of the delegates at stake in those states. Since the delegates are issued proportionally, even if Clinton wins with the same percentages she garnered in both states (55% in MI, and 50% in FL), and the cities go to Obama, where the rural areas go for Clinton, I doubt that Clinton would pick up many, if any delegates to cut substantially into Obama's lead.

As for the cost of a do-over---it should be borne by the State parties. They are the ones, after all, who chose to break the rules, and there should be consequences to rule-breaking. With a do-over, the consequences of not having your delegates seated would go away---so, assess a fine saying, "If you want your delegates seated, have a new election that the states pay for.

In the end, Obama will still win the pledged delegate vote.

[graywarrior]

1. Makes sense to me.

[rateyes]

3. Hey, friend.

:hi:

[graywarrior]

34. .

:loveya:

[dkf]

2. That is why Hillary doesn't want a do-over.

[rateyes]

I'd say that's true. nt

[Window]

13. Yep.

[stop the bleeding]

4. there you go again with rational thought

:popcorn:

[rateyes]

5. Can't help it.

I'm just built that way. :evilgrin:

[ellacott]

6. That's how Chuck Todd broke it down

He said they might as well split them 50/50 and save the money because neither will get a big bump from the delegates apportioned.

[rateyes]

8. That's true. nt

[MichiganVote]

7. Tell me something. Have you done any research into how this whole

primary date thing started in Michigan? Are you aware that Michigan agreed wholly to the new schedule and that it was NH that broke first when the DNC put up two smaller states first? Are you aware that NH has not been sanctioned at all? And that after the schedule was broken by NH, then Michigan's legislature changed its date? I suppose it makes no difference to you that both Iowa and NH told the candidates that they would not endorse voters to support Clinton or Obama if they campaigned in Mi.?

[rateyes]

9. I know one thing.

Michigan knew the rules disallowing them to move their dates forward. What NH did is not relevant to that discussion. I want MI seated---according to the rules they agreed to.

[MichiganVote]

10. So the party leaders in NH are stupid? Good to know.

[rateyes]

11. Show me the rule that said NH could not move their primary up.

Sorry, it's not there.

[MichiganVote]

14. All of the states agreed to a schedule. You know that, you've been wasting your breath

bellyaching about Michigan. But somehow if its NH, then its acceptable. No sanctions, no limits on delegates, nothing.

But that's ok. You've at least convinced one person of something---you don't know a thing about it.

Good luck on the high road.

[rateyes]

17. I'm talking RULES. The rule was that any state who went before

February 5, other than Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and South Carolina would lose their delegates. New Hampshire broke no RULE, and you can't point to a rule they broke.

I know I'm wasting my breath on you. Therefore, I won't do that after this post. If you want the last word----fine.

[rateyes]

12. Again, I want your delegates seated according to the rules.

[MichiganVote]

15. Yeah sure.....at this point I think the DNC just wanted Mi. out of the picture entirely.

[rateyes]

20. That makes sense. NOT.

[Johnny__Motown]

26. DNC didn't change our primary date. how the hell can you blame them?

that is just nuts

[MichiganVote]

31. But they did issue the sanctions that has everyone upset and they didn't do it for NH.

[yewberry]

35. I think you're mistaken.

MI moved their primary first. The MI parties made the agreement in August 07, and the governor signed the bill in September. NH moved their primary in late November.

[MadBadger]

16. In a redo, Obama wins Michigan and Hillary wins Florida

I think in the end she would gain delegates cuz a Florida win means more, but the talking points would be cancelled out.

[rateyes]

19. She wouldn't gain much.

Not enough to take the lead.

[MadBadger]

23. Oh, not at all. Maybe a plus 10-15 delegates

But they would both have their talking points. Look, Obama hasnt campaigned in Michigan and Rasmussen has this thing tied. He's down 16 points without campaigning...so I see him winning Michigan by 8, and losing Florida by the same margin.

As I analyzed previously, I think Obama has three strongholds in a Michigan Primary. 1&2 are the two huge 40,000 plus student Universities in Michigan and Michigan State. Second, the city of detroit is 83% African American. I think he could really run up the score in both those places.

In Florida, there are a ton of Universities that would help him a lot. There is FSU, UF, USF, UCF, UM, etc. Not to mention, in the democratic party, the black vote would outnumber the latino vote. Though Latino are 3 percent more than Blacks in Florida, in 2004, the African American vote was 21% compared to hispanic vote of 8%. Currently her lead is sixteen here, and I think he can close it here.

[rateyes]

24. Good analysis. nt

[loveangelc]

27. why do you think Obama would win MI? Wouldnt he have "won" as "uncommitted"?

[MadBadger]

30. I'm going by the latest poll which shows it tied 41-41

The Michigan "Primary" occurred right after NH. Obama stock is much much higher now than it was after Michigan. The turnout for Michigan was extremely low, and I think that is because of a lack of Obama supporters turning out. Not to mention now, Edwards is out too. As Ive stated before, I think East Lansing, Ann Arbor (who is a whore I might add), and Detroit would put Obama over the top in Michigan.

[loveangelc]

32. o ok. Is Ann Arbor a particularly liberal city?

[MadBadger]

33. Idk How LIberal the city is, but Ann Arbor and East Lansing are the home of UM, and MSU

Michigan and Michigan state. Both have a student population over 40,000, and we know how well Obama does with the youth vote.

[Johnny__Motown]

18. That is why we should do the re-vote. It helps us in the GE in both states and won't change who

our nominee will be


Also when Obama wins Michigan, Hillary's big state argument loses supporters. (I would say it loses credibility but it has no credibility to begin with)

[loveangelc]

29. how do you know she'll lose michigan? isnt she ahead???

[fadedrose]

21. I think about this all different than most people

To me it doesn't matter when they decided to have the primary anywhere, MI, NH, Puerto Rico, doesn't matter.

What is a primary anyhow - something to give the voters a chance to express their choice for whom they want as the nominee for president in the general election. This sort of assumes that the people who are still running at the time of the primary will be named on the ballot. And, on Jan. 15, there were 8 or 9 people still running (except in MI, they hadn't heard; NH's fault for not telling our governor about all the choices everybody had in Iowa and NH. Damn that NH)

Now, when the candidates said, for whatever reason or whoever told them, that they wanted their names removed from the ballot - HERE IS WHERE THE BIGGEST BOO BOO WAS MADE - Somebody should have said, "Hey, since all these contenders don't want to be in our primary, maybe we should just scrap the whole idea and hold off. No sense in having a primary with people who get less than 1% of the vote and only one main contender."

This is my gripe. Where were mom and dad when the kids were screwing up?

[caledesi]

22. Here in FL we were told that the Dem votes did NOT count....so

very few came out (including me - Obama supporter).

[rateyes]

25. That's right. nt

[Johnny__Motown]

28. Here in MI we were told that the Dem votes did NOT count..... so

many did not come out...


I voted Uncommitted at 7:40am in 4in. of fresh unplowed snow (3rd in my pct.) just to do whatever I could to dilute the numbers against Hillary. It was clear at the time that she did not take her name off the ballot for a reason (cheater).


Don't use me as a typical example though. Most of the people I know and told to go vote anyways still did not bother because no delegates were at stake.

[caledesi]

36. Txs. I feel better now knowing the facts. NT