Good news for 2.2 million betrayed Democrats: Delegate challenges to be heard

[Maribelle]

A plan to award half-delegates for the disputed Michigan and Florida Democratic presidential primaries will get a hearing before party leaders.

The co-chairs of the Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws committee sent members a memo Friday announcing a meeting May 31 to consider the idea.

The committee stripped Michigan and Florida of their national convention delegates because they held primaries too early. DNC members in Michigan and Florida have filed challenges to restore the delegates.

Under the challenges, all superdelegates from both states would get to vote. The pledged delegates would only count for half votes.

Hillary Rodham Clinton won both contests and has been pushing for the delegates to be seated.

more ...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PRIMARY_SCRAMBLE_FLOL-?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

While they are doing this, I would hope they would investigate the totally biased Brazile that demanded that the 50% rule be doubled to 100% of the delegates be slashed - - a totally corrupt and humongous political blunder.

[symbolman]

1. How did she "Win" in Michigan

When Obama's Name wasn't even on the ballot?

Ridiculous, and obviously biased... The Harpy will never rule my life, she can keep her fawning fools..

[Maribelle]

3. Obama chose to take his name off the ballot to pander to voters in New Hampshire ...

and the other early states, but especially to pander to voters in South Carolina.

[stillcool]

13. lies, lies, and more lies...

Kucinich Files Affidavit To Remove Name From Michigan's Primary Shortly Before Deadline

October 10, 2007 8:19 a.m. EST
Ayinde O. Chase - AHN Staff
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7008781843
Dover, NH (AHN) - The Kucinich for President campaign Tuesday afternoon officially requested that Kucinich's name be withdrawn from the Michigan Democratic primary ballot. The affidavit came by way of to the Michigan Secretary of State's office.The Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidates
National Campaign manager Mike Klein said in the statement, "We signed a public pledge recently, promising to stand with New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina, and the DNC-approved 'early window', and the action we are taking today protects New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary status, and Nevada's early caucus."
The statement continued: "We support the grassroots nature of the New Hampshire, small-state primary, and we support the diversity efforts that Chairman Dean and the DNC instituted last year, when they added Nevada and South Carolina to the window in January 2008. We are obviously committed to New Hampshire's
historic role." Klein who actually recently moved to Dover said, "We will continue to adhere to the DNC-approved primary schedule."

Governor Granholm and other Michigan Democratic leaders have openly criticized the decision by several presidential candidates to keep their names off the state primary ballot. The Michigan lawmakers are taken back by Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Edwards and Bill Richardson's decision to withdraw their names from the January 15th ballot.

The only ones who remain on Michigan's primary ballot are Hillary Clinton, Mike Gravel and Chris Todd.

December 1, 2007, 11:42 am
Democrats Strip Michigan of Delegates
By The New York Times

In a widely expected move, the Democratic National Committee voted this morning to strip Michigan of all its 156 delegates to the national nominating convention next year. The state is the party’s rules by holding its primary on Jan. 15. Only Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada are allowed to hold contests prior to Feb. 5.
The party imposed a similar penalty on Florida in August for scheduling a Jan. 29 primary.
The Democratic candidates have already pledged not to campaign in the state, and Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr., as well as John Edwards and Gov. Bill Richardson, asked to have their names removed from the state ballot.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/01/democrats-strip-michigan-delegates/

Editorial: Follow DNC rules on seating delegates
February 25, 2008
By Editorial Board

On September 1, the campaigns of Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) issued press releases stating that they had signed pledges affirming the DNC’s decision to approve certain representative states and sanction others for moving their nominating contests earlier. But now that the race is close, Clinton — whose top advisor Harold Ickes voted as a member of the DNC to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates — is pushing for the delegates to be seated.
Her argument is that not doing so disenfranchises the 1.7 million Florida Democrats who voted and that her pledge promised only that she wouldn’t campaign in the states, not that she wouldn’t try to seat the delegates. However, the results of the contests in Florida and Michigan are not necessarily representative of the voters’ preferences in those states. Given that most of the candidates removed their names from the
Michigan ballot, and that many voters stayed home from the vote in Florida with the understanding that their contest would not affect the final delegate count, the delegate totals that the candidates accumulated in these states may not accurately reflect the will of the voters. Had there been no restrictions in Michigan and Florida, the turnout, and thus the results, may have been different.

The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar...

Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) recently said that the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if they would decide the nomination. Other compromise proposals include holding new nominating contests in these states, but such contests would be expensive and cumbersome. The irony is that had Florida and Michigan not moved up their primaries, they would have voted in February and March, when they would have been even more important than in earlier months in determining the Democratic nominee — and would not have created an enormous controversy that has the potential to divide the party.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/2/25/editorialFollowDncRulesOnSeatingDelegates

[Maribelle]

23. And?

If you are trying to debunk the DNC statement regarding the May 31st meeting, you've failed.

[stillcool]

54. Here's what I am "de-bunking"

While they are doing this, I would hope they would investigate the totally biased Brazile that demanded that the 50% rule be doubled to 100% of the delegates be slashed - - a totally corrupt and humongous political blunder.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

89. "her name only one on the ticket in Michigan and still 42, 43 percent of the vote was against her,”

April 24th, 2008
Top House Democrat denounces Clinton campaign tactics

...On Thursday, Clyburn took Clinton and surrogates to task, complaining that they want the popular votes in Michigan and Florida counted, even though both states violated party rules for the early scheduling of their nominating contests.

“I think it’s so disingenuous … (adviser James) Carville and Sen. Clinton were all on TV. I’ve seen them two or three times this week, talking about counting Florida and Michigan.”

Obama did not campaign in those states because the Democratic Party said Florida and Michigan wouldn’t be included in the formal tally for the nomination. “Her name was the only one on the ticket in Michigan and still 42, 43 percent of the vote was against her,” Clyburn said.

...more at the link

http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/04/24/top-house-democrat-denounces-clinton-campaign-tactics/

[juajen]

102. Oh, really! Everyone knows that she was not the only one on the ballot.

Get Real!

BTW, everyone also knows that there was a concerted effort in Michigan by Edwards and Obama to have their voters vote uncommitted.

[LakeSamish706]

21. And Hillary signed an agreement that these two states would not count.... n/t

[Maribelle]

25. She signed an agreement that she would not participate in a campaign in Michigan and Florida.

She did not sign anything that said these two states would not count.

[Maine-ah]

36. question, an honest one too....

if she promised not to participate, then why didn't she take her name off the ballots?

[Maribelle]

44. Obama did not take his name of the ballot in Florida. Was that symbolic?

[Maine-ah]

62. it was an honest question, Maribelle,

no need for being snarkey. Not all of us here are trying to start a flame war.

I didn't know his name was on the Fl. ballot.

Though, I do think, regardless of who got what votes in either state, they still broke the rules by holding their primaries too early, and it's not like they were not warned about doing so.

What to do about it? I don't know. I'd hate to see the will of the people get tossed into the trash, regardless of who won the state.

Either way, I'm in this for the democratic party regardless of who our nominee is.

[Maribelle]

69. Sorry if that came across as snark.

I do not disagree that when the governor of Florida signed the bill into law in May of 2007 that it broke the DNC rules regarding early primaries. And at that time the DNC rules created for 2008 said that any states going early with DNC permission would be penalized by having them lose 50% of their delegates as a penalty.

What I am against is in August of 2007, three months after the bill was signed into law, the rules committee of the DNC jacked the 50% up to 100%. I am against the DNC attempting to punish all Floridian Democrats for the actions of the Republican-controlled legislature, who went into the 2007 session saying that changing the primary date was a veritable done deal. There was nothing Democrats could do to stop the law from being passed. What the Democrats were able to do, however, was to negotiate some of the other items that were in the same bill. Seeing that the final bill focused on creating a paper trail for votes, an extremely important issue for most Floridians, they went along with the bill.

[SwampG8r]

78. heres some debunking for ya

"There was nothing Democrats could do to stop the law from being passed."

the DNC only required a "good faith" effort against the date change

the florida DEM party went laughing to vote with the GOP 115-1

let me repeat that for the hard of thinking
good faith......115-1

and to seat the superdelegates from florida would be the most illogical of scenarios
as they are the ones who, with the orders of their DLC masters, went laughing to vote with the GOP

[boston bean]

92. and here's a little more debunking for you! that vote was tied to a vote for paper trail in

voting. Do you expect DEMS to vote against their one and only chance to get a verifiable paper trail?

[SwampG8r]

99. one and only chance?

what is it like a solar ecclipse?
and i voted touchscreen so where the hell is this all important paper trail?

[Moochy]

119. wrong place

self-delete

[Moochy]

118. Nice Fig Leaf

Just like it was a nice fig leaf for the traitors in Florida legislature who went along with it.

[WeDidIt]

64. Obama couldn't take his name off the ballot in Florida

Remember, every state has different rules for getting on and off the ballot.

If you recall, Dennis Kucinich attempoted to have his name removed from the Michigan ballot to comply with the DNC request and failed to file the proper paperwork on time.

[Maine-ah]

68. I just read that Florida law wouldn't allow Obama to remove his

name from the ballot.

[SwampG8r]

75. it was too late to remove his name (or anyones ) from the ballot in florida

thats why his name was on the ballot here in florida

that said he didnt spend the day before the election here in florida at "non campaign fundraising events" like she did

[bhikkhu]

157. self-delete-dupe

[BalancedGoat]

166. What I remember.

I remember reading that at that point it was already past the deadline for removing names from the ballot in Florida.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

58. What part of "participate" do you not understand?

She agreed not to participate in the primaries. She knew full well that they wouldn't count. And I guarantee you, if the situation were reversed and it was Obama trying to get these delegates counted, she'd be screaming bloody murder.

[Maribelle]

72. The voters of Florida did not sign any pledge not to participate ...

- - and they participated by selecting one name from a list. A majority of these participators selected Hillary's name from the Democratic ballot. They had every right to participate. The DNC has no say in this.

Hillary signed a pledge to the 4 states permitted to go early to not campaign or participate in Florida and Michigan, and she didn't.

[SwampG8r]

79. damn you need help

the dnc has no say?

the entire primary system is a system where the party makes the rules
get it?.....the dnc makes the rules
its nothing but a party exercise and has no meaning to anyone BUT the dnc
thats like saying parker brothers has no right to interpret the rules of monopoly

soon the cries of "disenfranchisement" will begin
so heres a clue on that score
if they dont count you in the GE
THEN you will be disenfranchised
not so in a primary

[leeroysphitz]

59. I voted in the Michigan primary. I voted UNCOMMITTED because that

was the only option aside from Clinton.

This is how Joe Stalin "won" elections. This is how Pinochet "won" elections. I'm not comparing Clinton to either of these evil dictators I'm just wondering aloud how you can keep a straight face while calling your position Democratic.

[aquarius dawning]

65. winning by disenfrachising two states doesn't seem like a very democratic position to me either.

I'm wondering how Obama supporters can keep a straight face while calling their position democratic frankly. fact of the matter is, between caucuses, superdelegates, and disenfranchisement, I'm wondering how we can call ourselves the Democratic party with a straight face.

[leeroysphitz]

80. I'm not an Obama supporter. Just a Clinton detractor.

Counting any state's delegates for any candidate who was the ONLY candidate on that states ballot is nonsensical. It's what they do in places that are only laughingly (wink wink) refered to as democracies. Anyone supporting such a position has put some other interest in front of traditional Democratic values.

It is not very complicated. You just want your team to win and you don't really care how you do it. I understand this. That's just how things are done, I get it. Just don't expect everyone to pretend it's something other than what it is. It is what it is and we all know what it is.

[aquarius dawning]

97. There are clearly two sides to this argument and neither one of them is very democratic

Barack chose to take his name off the ballot in Michigan. That's his own fucking fault as far as I'm concerned as he did it to assure NH and IA voters that he was committed to maintaining their hegemony over the election process which is, in and of itself, completly inconsistent with Democratic ideals. As far as Florida goes, he was on the ballot there and he lost on a level playing field despite having violated his aggrement to not campaign there. He is blatantly supporting the disenfranchisement of Florida voters in order to maintain a deleagte lead which,when combined with his committment to the IA/NH staus quo makes him the bigger commie/fascist by far in my book. This should be obvious to anyone with an unbiased mind. That it is not obvious to you suggests that you are not as dispassionate as you assert.


"Just don't expect everyone to pretend it's something other than what it is. It is what it is and we all know what it is."

I and millions of other Americans reject that nonsense. It is what it is but it is not what you say it is.

[leeroysphitz]

127. "his own fucking fault" You're right! So what?

It doesn't negate the incontrovertible and unmistakable fact that the only choice offered to Michigan voters like myself was between Senator Clinton and "uncommitted". Sorry but the results do not count they were not achieved via a truly Democratic process and therfore are not legitimate and no amount of legal wrangling (BS) can ever change that.

Nothing you have said can change that. Nothing you are even capable of saying will ever change that. I don't know, or care, about Florida (the primary results that is) but the Michigan results are not valid and any attempt to use them to secure the nomination are about as valid as Robert Mugabe claiming a mandate after the recount.

We all know what t is.

BTW if you have any questions about my impartiality look to my avatar. I assure that it is not meant as a positive statement.

[stillcool]

90. here's what she signed

Editorial: Follow DNC rules on seating delegates
February 25, 2008
By Editorial Board

On September 1, the campaigns of Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) issued press releases stating that they had signed pledges affirming the DNC’s decision to approve certain representative states and sanction others for moving their nominating contests earlier. But now that the race is close, Clinton — whose top advisor Harold Ickes voted as a member of the DNC to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates — is pushing for the delegates to be seated.
Her argument is that not doing so disenfranchises the 1.7 million Florida Democrats who voted and that her pledge promised only that she wouldn’t campaign in the states, not that she wouldn’t try to seat the delegates. However, the results of the contests in Florida and Michigan are not necessarily representative of the voters’ preferences in those states. Given that most of the candidates removed their names from the
Michigan ballot, and that many voters stayed home from the vote in Florida with the understanding that their contest would not affect the final delegate count, the delegate totals that the candidates accumulated in these states may not accurately reflect the will of the voters. Had there been no restrictions in Michigan and Florida, the turnout, and thus the results, may have been different.

The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar...

Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) recently said that the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if they would decide the nomination. Other compromise proposals include holding new nominating contests in these states, but such contests would be expensive and cumbersome. The irony is that had Florida and Michigan not moved up their primaries, they would have voted in February and March, when they would have been even more important than in earlier months in determining the Democratic nominee — and would not have created an enormous controversy that has the potential to divide the party.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/2/25/editorialFollowDncRulesOnSeatingDelegates

[JackORoses]

100. she didn't have to sign anything. She is participating in the Democratic Primary

the rules of which are determined wholly by the DNC.

She is bound by their rulings whether she likes it or not.

[PassingFair]

110. Depends on what the definition of "is" is....

I would rather not have this Clinton B.S.
in the people's house again.

[newmajority]

139. And she goddamn well DID campaign in Florida

Jan 27, 5:12 PM (ET)

By MIKE GLOVER

(AP) Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., listens to Rev. Samuel Kyles...
Full Image


SARASOTA, Fla. (AP) - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she was going to Florida to assure Democrats that "their voices are heard" and to underscore her commitment to seeing the state's delegation seated at the national convention.

Though the Democratic presidential candidates largely have heeded the national party's request that they not campaign publicly in Florida, Clinton said it's time to pay attention to voters there who are showing heavy interest in Tuesday's primary. Early voting is under way and drawing strong interest, she said.

"Hundreds of thousands of people have already voted in Florida and I want them to know I will be there to be part of what they have tried to do to make sure their voices are heard," Clinton said in Memphis, Tenn., before heading for Florida.

Once again, Hillary lies and dismisses the rules as if they don't apply to her arrogant ass. :grr:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080127/D8UEG4RG0.html

[Maribelle]

143. Hillary did not appear in Florida until all the polls closed and the primary was over,

Please do try to get your facts straight.

[newmajority]

146. Did you read the article I posted.

It specifically says that she was in Florida on Sunday, before the corrupted primary on Tuesday.

Nice attempt at history revision, Hillbot.

[Maribelle]

151. She was not campaigning however.

[Exilednight]

170. If you're name is was on the ballot then you participated. Names didn't come off FL ballots due....

to time constraints.

To participate means to take part in. If you're an olympic athlete and say "I'm not going to participate in the 100m dash, do you still line up in the blocks?

A: Only if your last name is Clinton.

[Maribelle]

171. The names didn't come off the Florida ballots because of time constraints.

That's a fallacy that seems to be perpetrated by Obama supporters, no? Another Florida rule dominated, the one about being a national candidate.

And if you're accusing Hillary of participating because her name was on the ballot, then you would have to accuse Obama, Edwards and all of the other candidates as well. Besides being untrue, it was the democratic party that gave the names to The State of Florida, abiding by election rules of the state, not hardly any of the candidates.

[helderheid]

77. Oh yes, right.

:eyes:

[Royal Oak Rog]

172. Is this the same honesty we would get with a Clinton presidency?

I think you just answered the question of anyone wondering whom they should support.... Now that's credibility.

[Maribelle]

174. So - it seems it is OK with you if we blame Obama for everything his followers say?

Just because the Obama campaign loves their double standards - - - don't believe for even a second the double standards are not blatantly obvious to those not in the cult. By your standards we should expect an Obama presidency based on the words of Rezko, Wright, Ayers, an a myriad of names in the process of popping up on the map of the unvetted Obama.

Thanks for the warning

:patriot:

[taterguy]

2. What's this "betrayed" shit?

What was stopping the folks in Michigan and Florida from moving to a state that obeyed the fucking rules?

[doggycat]

5. Are you serious?

Are you saying that the people of those states should have bought a house to another state, taken their children out of school and transfered them to another state, left their jobs and gone to another state, because some party honchos broke the rules? Yeah, that's practical.

[taterguy]

8. What's this "children" shit?

No one forces you to breed.

There's also no requirement that says you have to buy a house.

[doggycat]

12. So people should have gone to another state, rented an apartment

And the rest of things I cited in my first post? Lol. I don't know what you are smoking buddy.
Have you noticed that nobody in the DNC or even in the Obama campaign has brought up this cooky idea?

[taterguy]

15. I'm smoking a Camel Light cigarette

If you spent more time here you would have seen the multiple photos I post of myself smoking Camel Lights and you wouldn't have to ask such a stupid question.

[PassingFair]

115. NO, they should have protested VIGOROUSLY

when our state leaders decided to play
chicken with our votes...

I know I did.

State powers-that-be wanted to go first at all
costs, and the fact that it would help front-load
the process for Clinton was a *BONUS* for them.

I say we should split the Michigan delegates 50/50;
and seat the Florida delegates for Clinton as
voted, and give Obama the remainder.

That is the only compromise that seems fair at
this point.

Otherwise, go with the delegate count WITHOUT
MI and FLA and seat them AFTER the nominee is
named.

[flyarm]

9. !!

Why were none of the other states that did the same and broke the rules sanctioned???????

Oh and S.C. still has diebold voting machines for the 2008 election..while with Florida's bill we banned the DRE voting machines for the 2008 election and mandated VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOTS ..FOR 2008 GENERAL..THE ONLY STATE IN THE NATION TO DO SO.. and this was the bill the repiglicans attached the amendment to move the primary date..so for that we were punished..and none of us could understand immediately upon this bill being signed Dean and Brazile started pushing caucus on Florida..now we get it..yes sireee we get it REAL CLEAR NOW!!

so when is SC getting sanctioned?????????

and when are their citizens going to stand up like we did in Fla and get rid of diebold..and the dre's??????

oh i know wnen they bring in the vote for Obama in Nov..ahahahahaha..yeah right.

but this i can assure you..Dean < Obama and Brazile have lost Fla for Nov..and gift wrapped it for McCain!!

fly

[Maribelle]

49. I agree wholeheartedly with your post, fly.

[SwampG8r]

81. because of the "good faith" clause

your girl didnt act in good faith

[high density]

86. What other state(s) broke what rule(s)?

I am not aware of the DNC banning a certain type of voting machines, although I wouldn't mind them doing so.

By the way there are plenty of other states that have "voter verified paper ballots" in the form of optical scan.

[flyarm]

136. YES THERE ARE BUT HAS ANY OTHER STATE BANNED THE dre'S FOR 2008????

I DO NOT BELIEVE SO AND LAST YEAR IN MAY WHEN THIS BILL WAS PASSED fLA WAS THE FIRST TO DO SO FOR THE 2008 ELECTION

FLY

[davepdx]

88. South Carolina played by the rules

>> so when is SC getting sanctioned?????????

South Carolina has history of voting on Saturdays. They petitioned the DNC for a waiver in advance to change the date to allow a Saturday vote (1/26/08) instead of the Tuesday vote (1/29/08) set by the DNC originally.

The DNC approved this waiver petition as the sequencing of the approved state voting/caucusing schedule did not change. S.C. played by the rules.

Florida and Michigan altered the state voting/caucusing sequencing set by the DNC in August, 2006.

[flyarm]

135. AHHH YOU ARE WRONG..SC BROKE THE RULES AS WELL!

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/15/16429/5965
This horse has long been beaten to death, but this thoughtful diary about the MI/FL fiasco ignores the fact that, as commenter dhonig points out, it was the DNC that changed the rules of what the punishment would be for moving up the Mi and FL primaries. Rule 20(c)(1) of the DNC Rules on Selection of Delegates at the time the date changes were enacted by Michigan and Florida stated:


Violation of timing: In the event the Delegate Selection Plan of a state party provides or permits a meeting, caucus, convention or primary which constitutes the first determining stage in the presidential nominating process to be held prior to or after the dates for the state as provided in Rule 11 of these rules, or in the event a state holds such a meeting, caucus, convention or primary prior to or after such dates, the number of pledged delegates elected in each category allocated to the state pursuant to the Call for the National Convention shall be reduced by fifty (50%) percent, and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by fifty (50%) percent. In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation. In determining the actual number of delegates or alternates by which the state’s delegation is to be reduced, any fraction below .5 shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number, and any fraction of .5 or greater shall be rounded up to the next nearest whole number.
(Emphasis supplied.) The DNC, led by Howard Dean and Donna Brazile, changed the penalty rule for moving up a primary and ignored the violations of the rules by Iowa, NH and South Carolina.

These are the facts. Too many conveniently ignore the villains in this piece, the DNC, Howard Dean and Donna Brazile. I will not let them off the hook for this disaster.

[davepdx]

163. S.C. asked for an received a waiver from the DNC

Take a look at Rule 11, Sec. A that your post references:

11. TIMING OF THE DELEGATE SELECTION PROCESS
A. No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in
the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the
first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the
second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention. Provided, however, that
the Iowa precinct caucuses may be held no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in
February; that the Nevada first-tier caucuses may be held no earlier than 17 days before the
first Tuesday in February; that the New Hampshire primary may be held no earlier than 14
days before the first Tuesday in February; and that the South Carolina primary may be held
no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February. In no instance may a state which
scheduled delegate selection procedures on or between the first Tuesday in February and the
second Tuesday in June 1984 move out of compliance with the provisions of this rule.

South Carolina was approved in the rules to hold their primary prior to the first Tuesday in February. In October, 2007, they asked for and received permission from the DNC to vote 3 days earlier on a Saturday which was the customary day of the week to hold their primary. S.C. did not butt in line ahead of any state in the DNC approved schedule.

My post was not about Howard Dean or Donna Brazile and the penalty rule interpretation. It was about the approved primary/caucus sequence. S.C. did not alter the sequence.

To claim that a penalty must be applied to a state that asked for and received permission from the DNC to move up their primary 3 days (while not violating any sequencing conditions) is equivalent to a state jumping ahead in the approved sequencing (like FL and MI did) without permission from the DNC seems like comparing apples to oranges.

BTW, I agree about the DREs.

[Maribelle]

165. But it was August 2007 when the DNC pounced on Florida for moving their primary date.

Why?

[davepdx]

168. Here's a timeline that should help

Maribelle, Madfloridian's journal article has a link to an article in the Tampa Tribune that seems to explain the whole sequence of events.

Key paragraphs (the short story):
**
"Initially, Florida Democrats, who had wanted an earlier date for years, favored the idea of January. They assumed that because Florida was a key presidential battleground, the DNC rule would not be enforced.

State party Chairman Karen Thurman told the Tribune in November 2006, "I don't see any downside to it.""
.
.
""There was a miscalculation that because we're Florida, that's going to trump everything," Katz said.

But as the legislative session began in March 2007, DNC officials issued warnings of strict enforcement of their rule. "They needed to make an example, or they'd have had a rush of other states doing the same thing," Katz said."
**

The article and timeline in the link above give quite a bit more detail than I have indicated here.

[Maribelle]

173. No to your timeline links. I won't go there because of past proven disinformation.

The legislative session started in November 2006, not March 2007. By March 2007 HB 537 had already been voted on the first time.

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=158932

http://thefloridamasochist.blogspot.com/2006/11/earlier-presidential-primary-date-for.html

In the Senate: http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/index.cfm?Mode=Bills&Submenu=1&BI_Mode=ViewBillInfo&Billnum=0537&Year=2007

In the House: http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=35049&

Sadly it appears Hillary-Haters are going to continue on with their disinformation campaign ad nauseam ad infinitum, regardless of the truth.

Excellent sources for truth regarding the DNC stripping Florida of her delegates
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2008/states/fl.htm
http://florida-delegates.com/


And that question I asked: "Why?" - - it was related to South Carolina being approved to go early AFTER the DNC stripped Florida of all her delegates.

[davepdx]

177. You need to read the Tampa Tribune article referenced

> No to your timeline links. I won't go there because of past proven disinformation.
.
.
> And that question I asked: "Why?" - - it was related to South Carolina being approved to go early AFTER the DNC stripped Florida of all her delegates.
Posted by Maribelle

Why won't you look at the second link then? The Tampa Tribune is one of Florida's largest circulation newspapers, although it's pretty conservative IMO. I was more interested in you reading that link instead of MadFloridian's. I put her name and link there to give credit as the source for the Tampa Tribune link. Her statements, as far as I can tell, have been right on the money. You may disagree. But I don't see how you can disagree with a timeline that is based on facts.

Now to answer your question "Why". If by "to go early" you mean "why was S.C. approved by the DNC to go early, prior to Super Tuesday?" Because South Carolina was approved by the DNC to go ahead of Super Tuesday in August of *2006*, not August 25, 2007 (the date Florida's delegates were stripped).

Here's the bit in the Tampa Tribune timeline:
"August 2006: The DNC schedule also has a Feb. 5 cutoff, but with harsher penalties and four "early-state" exceptions. Florida Democrats, expecting no effect on their mid-March date, vote for it."

South Carolina was one of those "four early-state exceptions".

If by "to go early" you meant "why did S.C. ask for the waiver in October, 2007, after Florida's delegates were stripped in August? (move up 3 days)", then the answer was in my original link in post #88.

The answer is in these 2 paragraphs from that article:

"South Carolina has traditionally held the first in the South presidential primary. After considerable deliberation, the Democratic National Committee voted in 2006 to add South Carolina as a new pre-window primary (in the period between the New Hampshire primary and the opening of the window on February 5, 2008), thus affirming its early status . Democrats envisaged holding their primary on Tuesday, January 29, while Republicans were looking at Saturday, February 2. However, on May 21, 2007 Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) signed a bill to move the date of his state's presidential primary to from the second Tuesday in March to the last Tuesday in January. South Carolina party leaders indicated they would do what it takes to hold their first in the South position. On August 9, 2007 state Republicans announced Saturday, January 19 as the date for their primary. On October 16, 2007 state Democrats announced they would seek a waiver from the DNC to hold their primary three days earlier than planned, on Saturday, January 26.

Unlike in many states South Carolina's presidential primaries have in past been party-run affairs; this has posed a substantial financial and logistical challenge for the parties. However, in mid-2007 the General Assembly passed, over Gov. Mark Sanford (R)'s objections, a bill which requires that for parties wishing to hold presidential primary elections, the "State Election Commission must conduct the presidential preference primary." The General Assembly passed S99 on June 5, 2007, Gov. Sanford vetoed the bill on June 14, and the General Assembly voted to override the veto on June 19. The law left determination of the primary dates to the state party committees, and they have opted to hold their primaries on different dates while keeping to the Saturday tradition."

South Carolina asked for a waiver for the date as South Carolina's "elected officials took all provable, positive steps and acted in good faith to achieve legislative changes to bring the state law into compliance with the pertinent provisions of these rules" (2008 Delegate Selection Rules for the Democratic National Convention, Rule 20 C.7). South Carolina played by the rules. Period.

These are easily attainable facts if someone really wants to look for them. Facts are silly things. They keep getting in the way of emotional responses.

Edited to fix link.

[Maribelle]

182. The rant against Democrats in Florida here on DU has not been 'on the money'.

Not once. Not ever.

A simple for instance was the pathetic rant here on DU that because one state Democrat laughed when he was defending one of the the two updates submitted trying to have the primary date changed on the bill to the first Tuesday in February, that was proof 1.7 million Floridians should not have their voices heard.

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=874499.doc&DocumentType=Amendments&BillNumber=0537&Session=2007

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=290105.doc&DocumentType=Amendments&BillNumber=0537&Session=2007

[davepdx]

185. A rant about Democrats in Florida is not what I intended

but if that is how you see it, so be it. I was more interested in the sequence of what happened, when and why.

The amendments indicated in your two links were the responsible thing to do. Unfortunately the amendments failed in both the House and Senate. I spent a little time looking for the vote results (yeas/nays) on the amendments but I did not see them. That would have been interesting to see. But the effort on the Democratic amendments, though laudable, does not excuse (or explain why) these two Democratic Reps. who offered the amendments along with all the other Democrats in the House from voting unanimously with the Republican majority to pass 537. Your own link shows that the final vote in the House on 5/03/07 was 118 for, 0 against.

One of the really frustrating aspects to *everyone* is that the House Democrats could have protested the bill by voting against it. This would have been proof to the DNC that they had acted in good faith.

I do realize that one of the Republican committees had inserted the paper trail voting language which is something the Democrats, rightfully IMO, wanted. It is quite unfortunate that the Democrats did not protest by voting no on 537. The bill still would have passed and then the Democrats in the House (and Senate for that matter) would have been able to say that they had done everything possible to comply with the DNC's warning while getting the voting paper trail that they wanted. This is why I said "does not excuse" above.

I think that there have been mistakes made by all parties involved in this hairball (by both the DNC and the FL legislature). I initially got into this thread by responding to flyarm's comments about South Carolina's need to be sanctioned . You disagree with what I've written. That is your prerogative. I'll respond to your post #181 then I'm done.

[davepdx]

179. The legislative session in Florida starts in March

> The legislative session started in November 2006, not March 2007. By March 2007 HB 537 had already been voted on the first time.

This may be splitting hairs.

The regular legislative session starts in March per the Florida State Constitution.

It was voted on in committee prior as your link indicated but the original quote from the Tampa Tribune timeline seems to be referring to the regular session which starts in March when legislation can be voted on by the full legislature.

The DNC warning in March was, I presume, to tell Democratic legislators in Florida to not support any bill providing for a date change earlier than Feb. 5.

From the Florida Constitution:

SECTION 3. Sessions of the legislature.--

(a) ORGANIZATION SESSIONS. On the fourteenth day following each general election the legislature shall convene for the exclusive purpose of organization and selection of officers.

(b) REGULAR SESSIONS. A regular session of the legislature shall convene on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March of each odd-numbered year, and on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March, or such other date as may be fixed by law, of each even-numbered year.

[Maribelle]

181. Sheesh.The bill was introduced in Jan 2007.In Nov 2006 the new speaker took office with Start 100

Spin that. The paper is still wrong.

[davepdx]

186. That is why I said "This may be splitting hairs."

There is the organizational sessions that convene in November (committee assignments and initial work on bills) and there is the regular session (March) when bills are submitted to the full the legislature to eventually vote to pass, to vote to not pass, or to amend or table bills. That is why I said "the Tampa Tribune timeline seems to be referring to the regular session which starts in March." Splitting hairs I say.

It looks like your subject line was truncated. I could not find any reference to "Start 100". I suspect that you are referring to the new speakers "100 ideas" which seemed to be Rubio's agenda at the time.

[cali]

4. link to your claim that Brazille demanded that the "50% rule"

be doubled to 100%, and link that there was such a rule. It's my understanding that McCauliff instituted the punative measures being brought against MI and FL. There were two posts yesterday quoting Terry from 2004 on MI.

And sorry, but this won't be done before the primary season finishes up (except for PR) and they likely won't have a decision til well after that June 3 date. By that time, odds are we'll have a presumptive nominee who will have been put over the top by the SDs.

[Maribelle]

17. Here you go....

Donna Brazile Was Behind The Stripping of The FL/MI Delegations?
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/4/3/122945/9100


Seating Florida Delegates: Howard Dean Gets Motivated
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/2/205956/4474#readmore


A link to the c-span archives:

Karen Thurman, the Florida Dem party chairwoman arguing in front of the DNC to lift the ban on the tossing of Florida's election. (minute 26:04)

It is followed by Donna Brazile's response. (minute 37:34 - 41:10)

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&tID=5&src=atom&atom=recent_campaign_2008.xml&products_id=204502-1

[cali]

19. sorry, hillbots like armstrong aren't

credible. and here you go, in his own words, dear.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5689443&mesg_id=5689443

[Maribelle]

28. A simple review of the video shows Donna in action.

A picture is worth a thousand words, don't you know.

[madfloridian]

94. delete. wrong place

[UALRBSofL]

6. Maribelle, I can't speak for Michigan but here in Florida

We have to be heard. Were having a rally and petition drive in 10 cities today in Florida for our votes and delegates. However, it's Hillary, Barack supporters and it's a bipartisan movement. Were going to DC tuesday, protest at the DNC wednesday and return to Florida thursday. Maribelle, if you live in Florida do you want to go to DC tuesday? The money has already been raised by private donations and everything will be paid for. I'm not going because I'll be busy next week with the contractor putting new flooring in my house and also I can't make that long of a trip with my physical problems. However, I imagine it will be a fun trip and you'll get to meet Howard Dean. I'm pretty sure he will talk to the folks of Florida.

[JohnnyLib2]

7. Now, that's activism!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :hi: :kick:

[flyarm]

11. yes the trip to washington goes this tuesday...to protest Dean and the DNC!!

unfortunately i had plans for a long time to go see my son in Calif on Wednesday..or i would be on those buses.

fly

[Maribelle]

18. Thanks so very much for the invitation.

I will not be able to go because my husband will be having chemo next week.

I truly believe that this announcement by the DNC last night is a direct attempt to thwart the motivations of the Floridian activists.

[Blondbostonian]

26. When you say activists you mean Clinton supporters.

I'm sorry for your husband and wish him well. It doesn't excuse your lies and you know it. This isn't activism. IT's trying to steal an election.

[Maribelle]

29. Obama supporters are going too.

[Blondbostonian]

32. No Obama supporters are supporting this nonsense at all

I'm involved with the campaign down here in South Florida. We know what this sham is.

[Maribelle]

39. Florida is a big state, and extremely diversified, even between SW FL and SE FL...

there is a big difference in the demographics on either side of the swamp.

The protesters going to Washington DC are a broad mix of independents, Republicans and Democrats being organized by a new non-partisan group called Florida Demands Representation (FDR)

http://www.floridademandsrepresentation.org/EVENTS.html

[ruby slippers]

74. not to mention that NE FL is Red, red, red...............

[SwampG8r]

83. dont forget your pots and pans

[Blondbostonian]

20. This is complete bullshit

It's not a bipartisian movement whatsover. It's Hillary supporters organized by the Clinton campaign. You are a liar. Period.

From the Sun Sentinal here in South Florida TODAY!

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-flbdelegates0426sbapr26,0,7727825.story

Organizers of today's events say they're simply acting on behalf of the democratic process and average voters who participated in the primary.

"This is America. The vote should be counted as it was cast," said Linda Bird, a Fort Lauderdale Realtor organizing the Broward rally.

Tara Laxer, who is organizing the Palm Beach County rally, said it's not aimed at helping one candidate. "This is not about Clinton or Obama," she said.

Yet Bird and Laxer, along with all the effort's leading South Florida supporters, are all major players from the Clinton camp.

The featured guest at the Broward rally is U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, a national Clinton campaign co-chairwoman.

The event is sponsored by Gloria Wilson, a member of the Seminole Tribe's board of directors. Campaign records show Wilson has given the maximum allowable $4,600 in campaign contributions to Clinton.

And Bird is slated to become a delegate pledged to Clinton at the Democratic National Convention — if Florida gets to send delegates to the convention based on the Jan. 29 primary.

Nobody feels disenfranchised besides the supporters of Clinton here who are desperate for anything to help their dying campaign.

[UALRBSofL]

38. You are wrong about that

Schultz issue has already been addressed. We are very aware of Schultz speaking. That said, we encourage everyone to attend the rallies and any speaker is welcome. Everyone has been invited to go on the trip to DC as well. That said, there are Hillary and Obama supporters whom oppose the rallies and trip as well. I know 2 people going to the rally in Tallahassee who are Obama supporters from my home town. That said, you can say it's for Clinton all day long but with Obama supporters participating that debunks your conspiracy theory. This isn't about candidates, it's about treating Florida like it's a Marxist state and the folks in it being treated that way. There are a lot of people that do not care what the FDP and DNC decided, they are not going to be left out of the democratic process without being heard.

[rodeodance]

45. Very encouraging to hear that there are some Obama fans who are thinking about fairness

and the voters themselves and not about me me me me.
One gets a very distorted view in reading this DU board only.


Thanks for the posts.

[Blondbostonian]

48. I can say?

The people who are paying for these rallies and the trip to Washington are Clinton supporters. Did you read the article I posted?

Perhaps those two Obama supporters want some free food or a trip up to Washington. Perhaps they are Clinton supporters pretending to be Obama supporters.

The FACTS are these. IT's all being paid for by the Hillar Clinton biggest supporters in the region. All the media outlets recognize this. Nobody is up in arms over this besides Clinton supporters DESPERATE in trying to hold on.

You realize this is going to end badly for you. Please resolve yourself to helping Obama win in November. We already have an office in Ft Lauderdale and Hollywood openfor the GE and look forward in getting your help in winning the state.

[SwampG8r]

84. sheesh i called that right whaaaa disenfranchsement whaaaa

i am a floridian
so let me weigh in before the ship of DU is sunk beneath the bullshit brigade that represents mrs clinton

we arent disenfranchised
you are using the word wrong
if they dont let us vote in the GE
THAT will be disenfranchisement
a primary is a private party function
if everyone here voted for edwards would we be disenfranchised by his not being a candidate at the end of the PARTY nominating vote? no we would not

and as to the dnc all they asked was for a show of good faith
instead the party leaders here went laughing to vote WITH the gop on the date change
115-1

let me repeat for the hard of thinking 115-1
as a floridian i am glad to see that not one of our dirty cheating lying dlc members will get a seat
and i am working to unseat every dirty lying cheating corrupt one of them

[SwampG8r]

82. ill go

and ill tell him not to seat one of the florida supers
the whole group is a slimepit of dlc corruption

[hokies4ever]

161. FL Hillary supporters = suckers

Let's be real folks. The MI and FL delegates WILL be seated at the convention. Obama has just decided to let Hillary bloviate nonstop about it to keep her busy. Kind of like giving your dog a bone to chew on instead of tearing up the sofa cushions. Keep Hillary partially busy with MI and FL to try to mitigate her attempts to rip the Democratic Party to shreds.

[Demeter]

10. The Superdelegates Should Be Banned From the Convention

After all, these are the DLC hacks who set up the rule-breaking primaries.

[rodeodance]

46. good gawd!!

[Demeter]

70. I am referring to the MI and Fla Superdelegates

not all of them. In case that was your issue.

[intaglio]

14. Paging Dr Madfloridian

There's another Hillary devotee in need of Thorazine and Lithium

[TK421]

155. I highly doubt anyone will be seeking prescription advice from a Floridian..having lived there

I can tell you what a shit hole it is, but let's not get into meds here...I've met too many people down there that are well beyond the aid of meds, and most of those meds can't cure what is wrong with most of those people there.

[CatsDogsBabies]

16. Someone made the point in another post

that it is typical that many states do not get that much influence in the primaries. HRC herself believed that the race would be over by February 5, thereby "disenfranchising" all the states to come thereafter. MI and FL didn't need to move their primaries up this year in order to be "relevant." They knew the consequences of their decision and did it anyway.

[Jensen]

27. I'm in Florida and just as you said it was NO secret that we would not count....

many Floridian did not vote due to that fact they had NO interest in the homeowner tax break! The large turn out was due to the Homeowner tax break and NOT the Presidential primary!

[Maribelle]

34. Hundreds of thousands of Floridians voted that do not own homes. Crist said the votes would count.

Crist's words were on all local television stations in Flordia, and all major newspapers. Also, your supervisor of elections sent you a sample ballot, and told you your vote was important and would count.

And the votes were counted and placed in Florida's history books showing Hillary broke all historical records for primaries in Florida.

The DNC has absolutely no control over the popular vote in Florida. All the DNC has power to do is not seat the delegates.

[Jensen]

41. Crist is a Republican what he might have said did NOT count!

The DNC said that it would not count all the contenders for the primary had signed a pledge that it would not count and Senator Clinton herself said it would NOT count. Many renter's stayed home since they do not own a home and did not care about the tax break!

[Maribelle]

43. The DNC has no control over the popular vote in Florida, nor in counting the votes.

All the DNC can do is not seat the delegates.

[SwampG8r]

85. omg a new low ,,,,,,now the DNC doesnt count

[juajen]

30. What about other states that fooled around with dates for their primaries?

What is their punishment? You know, like South Carolina? I believe in equal treatment, so, take away Obama's win in South Carolina.

[CTLawGuy]

47. South Carolina and Nevada

applied for and got the two "diversity" spots in the "early window". What they did was legal.

Facts are your friend.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/07/new_hampshire_r.html

[Jensen]

51. Thanks for the info and link !

[Jensen]

50. I don't know what happen in SC! All I know is that we in Florida should have fought harder

and we didn't so we are paying the consequences of letting the leadership screw us out of "Our Votes" once again!

[Maribelle]

33. The DNC did not impose slashing 100% of Flordia's delegates until 3 months after the law was enacted

When Florida moved their primary up the DNC rule said 50%, and so did the RNC rules.

Slashing it to 100% has turned out to be a huge political blunder for the DNC.

[WeDidIt]

131. They knew the penalty could be as bad as 100%

before the date was changed.

They chose to roll the dice and risk it.

They chose poorly.

Now they are paying the price. There is no way Florida or Michigan will be allowed to alter the outcome. Doing so would destroy the Democratic PArty for all time.

[Maribelle]

144. Wrong again. Both Republican and Democratic rules said 50% when the bill was signed into law.

This was a huge political blunder for the DNC - Floridians can clearly see the Republicans had absolutely no problems.

[93ncsu]

22. Something that everybody seems to forget is ...

that it was a Republican Legislature and Governor that affected the move of Florida's primary.

Why is the party harming its members in Florida based on a decision that was out of the party's hands ?

[ErinBerin84]

57. So

Democrat Jeremy Ring, who introduced the bill, doesn't have to accept any of the blame?

[93ncsu]

111. You will disenfranchise over 2 millon people ...

because of the actions of one guy ?

Is Jeremy Ring the head of the party in Florida ?

I thought we were the party of "every vote counts". What happened to that principle ?

[ErinBerin84]

124. I'm sorry,

Jeremy was not the only Democrat in favor of this, despite the "The GOP robbed us" claim from the Clinton camp.I don't really go for the "disenfranchisement" argument...this is just my personal experience, so it is obviously biased, but the people who I know from Florida and Michigan did not vote on that day, because they knew that their vote would not count. They are royally pissed off knowing that their vote, in retrospect, could have affected the outcome. Why didn't Hillary Clinton make a bigger deal of this in the past? I would sympathize with her more if she weren't so fucking disingenuous.

[Maribelle]

145. Jeremy Ring did not introduce the bill.

On 1/23/2007 Rep. David Rivera (R-Miami) filed HB 537, Committee substitute filed 3/6/2007, Committee substitute passed as amended (115-1) on 3/21/2007, Senate Committee on Transportation and Economic Development Appropriations substituted for CS/CS/SB 960 on 4/26/2007, passed as amended (37-2) on 4/27/2007, House concurred with Senate amendments (118-0), engrossed, and enrolled on 5/3/2007, signed by Officers and presented to Governor on 5/9/2007, approved by Governor on 5/21/2007.

[Bensthename]

24. "Hillary Rodham Clinton won both contests ".. LMFAO.. Good one..

That is some fun shit.

[JoFerret]

31. There is a good chance that she would have

but I realize that is not enough and it is purely hypothetical.
But it is likely that she would have won them back then.

[Bensthename]

37. Considering Obama has won twice as many states

There is no way to tell.. And she may have won Fl due to name recognition, but if Obama would have campaigned there is no way of knowing who would have won.. Same with MI.

[JoFerret]

42. I think we can take a good guess though

...looking at the states she has won and the demographics in each. Would you not agree?

[juajen]

109. Don't be stupid. She won FL then and would win it again in a

New York minute. It's her demographic. Same thing in MI, though probably by less votes. If this weren't true, Obama would not have protested the re-votes.

[JoFerret]

132. That seems about right.

And it explains why the Obama campaign is so anxious not to have those votes counted.

[msallied]

147. yeah, maybe she would have won it in the same way she won

Pennsylvania and Texas... in such a way as to not alter the outcome of delegates won to push her ahead. It's not a winner-take-all system, remember.

[Maribelle]

35. The DNC has no control over the popular vote in Florida and Michigan.

All the DNC can do is not seat the delegates.

[merh]

40. Hillary was the one one on the Michigan ballot

The following is a statement by Clinton Campaign Manager Patti Solis Doyle.

"We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process. And we believe the DNC’s rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role. Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC approved nominating calendar."

[rodeodance]

52. Dean has been dragging his feet on this--to Obama's advantage.

[Maribelle]

55. Had Dean kept the 50% rule as the RNC did, Hillary's big win in Florida would have

given her the momentum needed and there is a good chance Obama would have been long gone.

My thoughts are that Dean and Brazile's actions were not necessarily intended to punish Floridians but rather to keep the Florida vote from giving Hillary the momentum. Dean and Brazile must have thought Obama was going to win in New Hampshire as he won in South Carolina, as I believe their motivation was based solely on giving these early victories for Obama more say in the primary.

The tragedy in all of this is that IT FREAKIN WORKED. Hillary was robbed by Dean's and Brazile's attempt to get Obama the nomination. My thoughts only -- please don't ask for proof.

:hi:

[rodeodance]

60. you filled in the details of my short post. Thanks

[WeDidIt]

61. Dean had nothing to do with stripping the delegates

It was the rules and bylaws committee that stripped the delegates.

Dean only enforced their ruling.

Blaming Howard Dean for the situation is akin to blaming the sheriff for locking somebody up that a judge has sentenced to three months in jail.

[MaineDem]

133. Facts don't matter to some.

I've stopped trying.

[hokies4ever]

160. Too bad that Hillary didn't fight for herself

when she could have fought for FL and MI earlier, instead of waiting until it was clear that she would need them to close the pledged delegate gap (and not win). Funny how those delegates would not be enough to put her in the lead over Obama, so you have to argue that the momentum from the wins would have put her over. LOL! Are you serious? We're now basing the race on the momentum from two cherry-picked states???

[Maribelle]

164. Save your laugh for something worthwhile. I did not mean the momentum should be factored in now.

Hillary clearly stated she would fight to get the Florida delegates seated, long before the January primary. And many Floridians once believed Obama would also.

Back in August of 2007 Obama hired Ashley Walker, former campaign manager for Obama supporter Jeremy Ring, yes that Jeremy Ring that the DNC rules committee faulted because he was a sponsor of the move-up bill, and they saw this as a sign of eagerness on the part of some Democratic leaders to break the rules -- thus the 100% punishment. You talk about corruption.

http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2007/08/obama-hiring-fl.html

[hokies4ever]

188. Spinning out of control

trying to blame Obama for the DNC's decision to strip FL and MI of their delegates. I understand your passion though, because you're just ardently supportive of your candidate. Kind of like why I don't hate Hillary. Even when she says things like there's no such thing as a pledged delegate, I know she's just saying that because she's trying to win, not because she's advocating that all states be stripped of their primaries and caucuses.

[Usrename]

138. Dean is following the party rules.

What is he dragging his feet about?

[WeDidIt]

53. The timing is interesting and is not great for Clinton

Barack Obama will have exceeded 50% of all pledged delegates from contests that were legitimate under the rules on May 20. Super Delegates will most likely recognize him as the presumptive nominee on that date.

It will be difficult for the rules committee to make any move that would overturn those results.

[wileedog]

87. She doesn't care about the delegates

She wants to count those elections so she can add that tally to the popular vote and legitimize her claim that "more people voted for her" (screw caucus states).

Popular vote is the only shot she has left, but she needs those two elections to count somehow to even have a prayer at that.

[WeDidIt]

130. then the estimates from Iowa, Washington, Nevada, and Maine

will have to be added.

And after NC, it won't matter.

None of it will matter because the SDs will have already gone for Obama.

MAthematically, her chances are less than 5% at this time. After May 6, they will be less than 1%.

[crispini]

56. This is the same rules and bylaws committee that imposed the penalty in the first place.

So, nothing will happen. :hi:

[WeDidIt]

66. I wouldn't say that

I'd say the most likely outcome will be Florida is seated as is with each delegate getting half a vote. Michigan will be seated 50-50 with each delegate getting half a vote. End of the day, Obama will still have more than 50% of the pledged delegates on May 31 and the meida will still proclaim him the presumptive nominee.

[goldcanyonaz]

63. YAY!

[madrchsod]

67. you mean betrayed by their state party leadership?

i agree. the florida and michigan state party leadership betrayed their fellow democrats..i don`t blame the people in these states for being pissed off for their leadership disenfranchising them. i would hope the people vote for new leaders...

[ScarletSniper]

71. Yawnnn...she can't win. It's over. Let her stay in until June, but she can't win..

[ruby slippers]

73. and to think Obama didn't even get a chance to campaign here in FL

sad, sad, sad......he would have gotten more than half.....

But, half is better than nothing

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

76. Hillary agreed to rules, her advisor Howard Ickes voted for the penalties this is an old song

Hillary can't win so she hopes to discredit the process.

[mtnsnake]

120. You really have to stop letting your anger get in the way of reality

Hillary can't win so she hopes to discredit the process.

If she couldn't win, then she wouldn't still be in the race, genius, or maybe you forgot that NEITHER of them can get enough pledged delegates to win the conventional way and that it will be going to the super delegates where she most certainly CAN win. I see you're still spamming the boards, though, with all your nonsensical outbursts and tantrums.

[Joe the Revelator]

91. I am just so so sick of Hillary Clinton, and her rule changing bullshit.

[Poll_Blind]

93. Me too, this is bullshit, against the rules, and soley for Clintons benefit. n/t

PB

[madfloridian]

95. Okay, here I go again. First off, it is only being HEARD that day.

The primaries are done 3 days later. The decision will not be given before the primaries are over. Then it will go to the credentials committee.

Now the video Maribelle posts later in the post:

I recommend people start about the 20 minute mark...it is all Roger Simon of Politico "interpreting" it to C-Span at that point. He is giving just one interpretation. Roger Simon of Politico...nuff said.

Karen then at minute 26 says Florida made all good faith efforts. That is simply a lie. They did not.

Voting 115 to 1 is not good faith. I feel another summary post coming on.

Florida went before the committee that had floor transcripts on their efforts, which were not efforts at all.

I feel sad that Clinton must win so badly that her FL surrogates lie.

[Maribelle]

106. I know how much it must really aggravate you, it looks like Florida delegates will vote in Denver.

Grrrrr.

Donna Brazile and her "Obama factor" might be on their last legs today.

[madfloridian]

123. No, Maribelle, it is just a hearing. It is the same committee that sanctioned them.

:shrug:

[madfloridian]

96. The whole committee voted for the 100% rule. Please tell the truth.

[BzaDem]

98. WHO CARES?

If they didn't, it STILL would have passed.

Your summary posts keep saying the same things over and over, and they are all beside the point.

Yes, we know the state party screwed up.

Let's repeat:

Yes, we know the state party screwed up.

BUT:

No, we don't want to penalize the VOTERS for it.

[JackORoses]

101. Flawed elections will not determine our Nominee

But, as the nominee, Obama will seat those delegations at the Convention.

[WeDidIt]

134. Obama will be the nominee on May 20

The whole point of the 100% sanctions was to guarantee any states that violated the rules would have absolutely no say in who the nominee would be.

And that will be the outcome. Obama wraps it up on May 20. After June 3, the delegates from FL and MI will be seated in a way that does not alter that outcome.

[madfloridian]

104. I care.

I care that the wife of a former president wants to win bad enough to hurt the whole party...perhaps rip it apart.

[Maribelle]

105. Oh brother. Obama supporters are part of the bus trip to Washington.

The only ripping the party apart I see is folks like you that keep repeating ad nauseum irrelevant crap such as a legislator laughing proves he didn't make a good faith effort.

[Blondbostonian]

107. You're full of shit Maribelle

You insult the intelligence of the people on this message board.

This is a paid event sponsored by the biggest Clinton supporters down here. The media sees this as a political event.

Your spin that a few Obama supporters are taking a free trip to Washingon (and by the way that hasn't been documented in one media article that I've seen) and this is some sort of bipartisian event is laughable.

In others words, you're a fraud.

[Maribelle]

112. Bully tactics from some Obama followers will not change reality. Give it up.

Fortunately for some of the Obama followers on this board, not all Obama supporters are as offensive.

[Blondbostonian]

116. there is no bullying going on here

YOu are lying. YOur claim that it is a bipartisian event is false.

[Moochy]

122. Likewise for your side, ugly lies .. ugly poster

[madfloridian]

108. The events are being organized by Hillary's people in Florida.

I guess if Obama people want to go....let them. Actually, Maribelle, I think what Hillary has done to the party is being understood by more and more people.

She might somehow in the end....win by what I would call brute force. But it would be just about her.

http://www.miamiherald.com/campaign08/story/507468.html

"Other Florida Democrats -- led by Hillary Clinton supporters -- are turning to public protests to keep the pressure on the national party.

Rallies are planned Saturday in seven Florida cities, including Miami and Fort Lauderdale, to demand that the national party count Florida's delegates. Hundreds of activists are also expected to ride buses to Washington to rally Wednesday.

''This has to do with our civil rights,'' said Millie Herrera, a potential Clinton convention delegate and the president of the Hispanic Democratic Caucus of Florida. ``No one has the right to invalidate our votes.''"

[Moochy]

121. I care... People care that your side has repeatedly lied about this bs

[Usrename]

141. Clinton wants to punish the voters for being stupid enough to trust her.

That's what this whole argument is about, isn't it?

She thinks it's fine to lie to the people and tell them that nobody's votes will count, and then say "Haha! Fooled you guys!"

The only reason anyone would make this argument is to punish all the voters who believed her.

Is there some other point to it?

[Maribelle]

103. The 'whole committee' did not vote for it.

There you go again with your superlatives that are simply false.

[Blondbostonian]

113. another article

Maribelle is a liar.

Organizers of today's events say they're simply acting on behalf of the democratic process and average voters who participated in the primary.

"This is America. The vote should be counted as it was cast," said Linda Bird, a Fort Lauderdale Realtor organizing the Broward rally.

Tara Laxer, who is organizing the Palm Beach County rally, said it's not aimed at helping one candidate. "This is not about Clinton or Obama," she said.

Yet Bird and Laxer, along with all the effort's leading South Florida supporters, are all major players from the Clinton camp.

The featured guest at the Broward rally is U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, a national Clinton campaign co-chairwoman.

The event is sponsored by Gloria Wilson, a member of the Seminole Tribe's board of directors. Campaign records show Wilson has given the maximum allowable $4,600 in campaign contributions to Clinton.

And Bird is slated to become a delegate pledged to Clinton at the Democratic National Convention — if Florida gets to send delegates to the convention based on the Jan. 29 primary.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-flbdelegates0426sbapr26,0,7727825.story

[Maribelle]

150. Florida Demanding Representation (FDR) is non-partisan and contains Obama supporters as well

http://www.floridademandsrepresentation.org/index.html

[WillyT]

114. Ya Might Wanna Take A Lookee Here:

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5694525&mesg_id=5694525

:shrug:

[PassingFair]

117. Clinton's have finally figured out that the CANNOT win with chicanery.

Expect SHRILL OVERLOAD in their
preposterous bid to seat "her"
delegates.

Stand firm, DNC!

[smiley_glad_hands]

125. Michigan cannot count, Fl can have half its delegaton.

Thats as close to far as its going to get. Doesn't matter, she still can't win.

[anonymous171]

126. THEY BROKE THE RULES

[Gore1FL]

128. If you want Brazile investigate, then I guess you want Ickes investigated too

for the exact same reasons. He demanded it too in the same vote.

You can reach him for comment at the Clinton campaign.

[Maribelle]

149. Fine with me. Investigate them all.

[dkf]

129. They break the rules they take the consequences.

The people of those states should condemn their leaders for screwing up and put the blame where it belongs.

[NeedleCast]

137. No Means No

[billyoc]

140. She's still lost with every single vote from both states. It's over. nt

[AZ Criminal JD]

152. She is ahead in the popular vote. Long from being over.

[billyoc]

167. She is not ahead in the popular vote, states won, or delegates.

Even with FL and MI included, which they never will be.

[Maribelle]

176. The popular vote will always be included in this year's record - and Hillary is ahead.

You might be thinking the the DNC has some sort of control over the popular vote. Well they don't. The DNC only has control over the delegates to their convention.

Each State has the legal authority to certify the popular vote in their elections. Florida has certified the popular vote of January 29th, and Florida records indicate Hillary handily beat all other contenders and history will reflect she broke all prior records.

[AZ Criminal JD]

184. You don't know what you are talking about. As usual.

Clinton votes: 15,116,688 votes
Obama votes: 14,994,905 votes
Count every vote. Get used to it. It seems people have not learned anything from 2000.

[nichomachus]

142. How to kill a political party -- Step 1

If they do this backhanded move, it will be the death of the Democratic party. Guaranteed.

[Maribelle]

148. Disenfranchising 2.2 million voters was a backhanded move to being with.

Punishing that many democrats because of the actions of a relative few is mind boggling, and does not equate to democracy.

[nichomachus]

169. Then Hillary should have thought of that before she agreed to it

If Hillary wins fair and square -- even if that means strong-arming SDs -- I will support her. That's the process and whether I like the outcome or not, I will support it.

If she pulls it off through this deceitful underhanded move, she will prove herself dishonest -- and there is no way I can vote for someone as scurrilous as that. I will sit out the election -- and I know other who will too. I cannot vote for someone who will not keep their word -- period.

[Maribelle]

175. Long before the Florida primary, Hillary said she would fight to seat the delegates.

She said this loudly. She said this adamantly. And NOW you call her deceitful????

Please.

NOW you merely realize if she is successful in her long-held believe that the delegates should be seated that it will win her the nomination. So call out more of the heavy guns of disinformation, shall we?

[madfloridian]

178. Another lie, Maribelle. Read this...watch the video

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1976

[Maribelle]

180. I won't clink on your endless promotion of your own journal. Too much disinformation there for me.

Sorry.

[madfloridian]

183. It is a MTP video...it documents Hillary's acceptance of the rules.

How sad you don't want to read truth.

[hokies4ever]

153. Hate to break it to the Hillary supporters. . .

but seating Florida and Michigan delegates will actually HURT her chances now, instead of helping them. If her campaign didn't suck so much at math, they would realize this. Let me try to explain it in a way you can understand. Hillary's best chance right now is an all-out superdelegate coup, plain and simple. If the Florida and Michigan delegates are seated, she will close Obama's overall delegate lead by a few (but he will still have a large delegate lead), BUT he will be many delegates closer to securing the nomination with 2024 delegates. That is to say, he will need fewer undecided superdelegates in order to reach 2024. Hillary's 5th grade math teacher is rolling over in her grave right now. Hillary's best strategy to win is to make sure that the MI and FL delegates are not seated, have MI and FL popular vote count in place of the delegates, and sell the idea that the popular vote is what should be the best metric for determining the nominee, and convincing the undecided superdelegates of this. A tall task indeed, but this is her path to victory. Seating the MI and FL delegations will actually decrease the number of undecided superdelegates that Obama will need to secure the nomination.

But don't worry. Hillary will realize this in a couple of weeks, then find a way to advocate not seating the delegates. That's the great thing about Hillary. If you're unhappy with her position on the rules of this nomination, just wait a little while and she'll change her tune.

[Maribelle]

154. Obama can only win with an all-out superdelegate coup.

[hokies4ever]

156. Not quite

Many websites (I don't have a reference on hand, but I'm sure someone does) have analyzed the superdelegate situation for both candidates. To steal a baseball metaphor, Barack Obama's magic number is about 60, he will end up needing ~60 undecided superdelegates to break his way to secure the nomination. This number takes into account the add-on delegates which are grouped as superdelegates, but are chosen according to who won various states. So as soon as Obama gets about 60 or so undecided supers, Hillary is done.

Also, by superdelegate coup, I mean that Hillary will need a huge swath of the undecideds to come her way, at least 80% after you account for the add-ons.

Once again, the point of this thread is seating the MI and FL delegates. I stand by my earlier analysis proving that it will be harmful to Hillary. Here's a good basketball analogy. Obama is 20 points ahead in the 4th quarter with 1 minute left. Odds are that Hillary will lose the game. Seating the MI and FL delegates is like shaving Obama's lead down to 16 points, but now there's only 20 seconds left in the game. Hillary is celebrating that she cut into his delegate lead by a little, all the while not realizing that Obama is succeeding in running out the clock, because the delegates he gets means that he will need FEWER undecided supers to break his way. Make sense?

[Maribelle]

158. Look it's not like a basketball game, when the buzzer goes off it's over. It's that magic number.

The first candidate that reaches 2025 (or whatever the magic number is today) through any combination of delegates wins. Obama will not reach that number without some of the remaining superdelegates. And those remaining superdelegates will be looking at the popular vote, who has won the big sates, and most importantly who they believe will be the best candidate for the GE and for winning back the White House.

[hokies4ever]

159. Yeah, it's not a game

but Hillary thinks it is. Anyway, you're missing the bigger point. Seating the MI and FL delegates will make it EASIER for Obama to get the nomination because he will need FEWER undecided superdelegates in the end. That's the point of this thread, right? To discuss seating MI and FL delegations. Hillary's campaign sucks at math. They need to realize that it is NOT in their best interest to seat the MI and FL delegations, but to instead somehow find a way to not have the delegates seated, blame it on Obama, and convince some more superdelegates to come to her side because of this. That is Hillary's path to the nomination. This is precisely why some Democrats will call for her to drop out after the primaries are over, because her path to the nomination is a brutal one. It's a combination of 'Obama can't win' and 'Please coronate me'.

[Maribelle]

162. Maybe you're missing a point...

or maybe not

If MI and FL delegates are brought back into the equation, then the magic number goes up by half of the total delegates in Florida and Michigan. But in addition, the superdelegates from Florida and Michigan would also be allowed back in.

So if the total delegates in MI and FL are allowed back in, the magic number becomes 2208; Today, Obama will have 1796, Hillary will have 1785, with 747 remaining delegates and uncommitted super delegates.

My source for these numbers:

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

[rodeodance]

187. maybe Dean is wising up?? losing MI and FL in the GE would not be cool.

[JoFerret]

189. What a mess.

But we have to find a way to count the votes/ value the electorate.