If situation was reversed, HRC supporters would not want FL/MI 'voices heard & votes counted'

[The Ghost]

Discuss.

[msongs]

1. they shouldnt be counted. Both had a chance to revote and turned it down nt

[MercutioATC]

6. Agreed...from so many standpoints...

1) They were warned not to move their dates up, but did so anyway.

2) In FL, the Repubs have the majority, but all but one of the Dems voted to change the date, too.

3) After they moved their dates up, they were told again by the DNC that their delegates would not be seated, but that they could hold primaries, onder the original rules, on or after their original dates (at their own expense) and those delegates would be seated.

4) Both MI and FL declined to take advantage of this offer.

5) In FL, Dems submited legislation designed to "protest" the change of date after the fact to show the DNC that they shouldn't be penalized for the date change...and laughed about it.

Justice would dictate that the delegates from FL and MI not be seated at all. However, this is politics.

A compromise solution would be to strip all superdelegates from FL and MI who actually voted to change the dates of their SD votes and seat FL as is with 1/2 delegates and MI giving the "uncommitted" voters to Obama with 1/2 votes. This would both "count the votes" in FL and MI and provide a serious disincentive for future rules violations.

[MGKrebs]

2. If situation were reversed, Obama supporters would want MI/FL votes counted.

[SoonerPride]

4. Not me. I appreciate rules and those who play by them.

Thanks for assuming what I'd want though.

[MGKrebs]

36. What rules are you referring to?

[MGKrebs]

38. Oddly enough, Obama himself wants them counted...

IF he already has the nomination in hand. What rule is that?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/15/america/15rules.php

[Apollo11]

9. I am sure most of them would.

I doubt we will find one willing to admit it, though. :eyes:

[sfaprog]

13. No, this is what Republicans do. - Name ONE instance of Obama or his supporters doing this

Please, one single link to where Obama or his supporters have tried to manipulate rules to increase their power.

It's not just some of her supporters but Clinton herself pushing this rules-to-fit-me meme.

[dsc]

16. The so called national ad buy

that just happened to include Florida, the killing of the Michigan revote just to name two.

[sfaprog]

20. Riiiight. Good logic. "killing the MI revote" entails changing the rules

The rules were that MI wouldn't get a say. And Hillary http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=3134>agreed to those rules. We are talking about the original primary rules. You are saying that by Obama not allowing Hillary's rule change, that he wants to change the original rules. Simply void of logic.

[flpoljunkie]

22. The "national ad" buy was well within the rules. Counting MI, FL--not so much!

[dsc]

24. no it wasn't

it was a direct skirting of the rules and totally dishonest. Had Hillary done that she would have been crucified for it.

[flpoljunkie]

42. Hillary spent the weekend in Florida, had a victory rally election night, media didn't crucify her.

[walldude]

12. That may be true, but the situtation is not reversed is it..

and it's not Obama's people trying to break the rules. Fla, and Mi would be debatable with Obama supporters were he losing but I can tell you that no one in his camp would have pulled the brilliant :eyes: strategy of changing the delegate numbers from 2025 to 2209. Hillary and her people want the rules changed because they lost. Period.

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. Is it trite to remind you of what we learned in 2nd grade?

Winners never cheat, and cheaters never win.

[dsc]

3. My position would be exactly the same

they should get the penalty they were told they would get (1/2 of elected delegates no super delegates).

[QC]

5. Likewise, the Obama mob here would be posting countless threads

about the paramount necessity of counting every vote.

It all depends on whose ox is being gored.

[MercutioATC]

8. For many of us, at least, it isn't about the advantage...it's about the rules.

I care a lot less about who sees an advantage or penalizing FL and MI than I do about honoring the rules and providing a disincentive to break them.

[QC]

17. It's strange to see Democrats obsessing over rules,

especially to the point of throwing out millions of honest votes in order to uphold "the rules," but--surely by some complete coincidence--it just happens to be supporters of the candidate who benefits from throwing out those votes who are always talking about the rules and how those who break them must be made to feel the lash.

Again, it all seems to depend on whose ox is being gored.

The losers, of course, are those of us who are having our votes thrown out because a bunch of pols are squabbling and demanding that people "respect mah authoritah." I am one of those people, by the way, and I will not soon forget all this.

[MercutioATC]

27. Actually, the ultimate responsibility falls on the voters.

Those legislators didn't magically appear at that vote...


That said, it's not "odd" to see Dems insisting on rules being followed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but ALL of the candidates (including Clinton) agreed that the MI and FL delegates would not be seated...and Clinton never said a word about "protecting the voters' rights" until it became apparent that she needed those votes. If there's any claims of ulterior motives to be thrown around, they belong at Clinton's feet, not Obama's.

[QC]

29. I vote every time the polls are open and still have Republicans representing me.

I guess I'm just fucked, in your breezy, casual recounting of voter responsibility. I guess I should be glad I'm even allowed to vote at all and should not be so presumptuous as to expect that my vote actually mean anything.

But I do agree that neither candidate was concerned about our votes until the election turned out to be closer than expected. Both thought they could just throw away Florida and Michigan, but then reality--and raw self-interest--intervened.

As for the rules, we all agree that anarchy is not a good thing in conducting an election, but let's not forget that "the rules" everyone is squawking about are rules designed to give two tiny, lily-white microstates a monopoly on both parties' presidential nominations. These rules are responsible for such abominations as the ethanol mandates that have brought us $4 milk and $5 cereal, and they usually result in us nominating losers, since the choice of white farmers in remote corners of the nation is not necessarily very appealing to other sorts of people everywhere else. It's time to end the IA/NH duopoly, not defend it by disenfranchising nearly 10% of the nation.

[MercutioATC]

35. Oh, we're in complete agreement about the silliness of the schedule...

...and I'd love to see the system changed to a popular vote count, including the general election.

However, that's not the way things are at this moment. Until we change the rules, I believe we should abide by them.


My comment about voter responsibility was directed at the voters in MI and FL who voted for the Dems who voted to change the dates. As a Republican won in your district, the comment wasn't directed at you.

[pompano]

21. Frankly I'm surprised.....

that now the Republicans know Obama is the strongest candidate in leiu of Hillary they aren't screaming from the highest mountain to count the delegates in Fl. as is.

I haven't put it past them yet.

Few advocate not counting the votes. Count them only after they were cast on a fair playing field. People were led to believe that their voting was useless and would not be counted. If one didn't own property it was even more futile to go to the polls.

I have never played very much into the Fl. needs punishment game, nor do I subscribe to the idea of hurry up and seat the delegates while Hillary has an unfair advantage and thats exactly what would happen if these delegates were seated as is. Hillary and Co. needs to understand voter disenfranchisement can work both ways.

She sure screams the loudest about seating the delegates as is. A person with a shred if dignity would be screaming about getting it right and fair for both candidates. To her, it was never about voter disenfranchisement. It's obvious by what she as demanding. But, these are the Clintons we are dealing with.

[DAGDA56]

7. Perhaps a better framing of your question would be; "If it was all over by Super Tuesday...

...would anybody now care about the FL/MI votes?" That was the HRC plan, remember.

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. Perhaps. Nevertheless, what's the right thing for the *democratic* party to do? n/t

[Straight Shooter]

11. You don't speak for me.

I would say, let them be counted and let the chips fall where they may.

[sfaprog]

14. Unfortunately, Clinton also doesn't think MI and FL should count

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=3134

[Straight Shooter]

18. OP is referring to the political situation as it exists currently. n/t

[sfaprog]

23. Oh, I'm sorry - there was a change in rules midway through the contest?

When did that happen?

[Straight Shooter]

26. Stay focused. OP said "if situation was reversed"

OP did not ask us to go back in time and say "what if then"

[sfaprog]

31. Stay focused. We haven't gone "back in time"

The rules Hillary agreed to still exist and are still the same.

[MGKrebs]

39. So we can cancel the May 31 rules committee meeting?

I thought there was a rule that said the rules committee could determine how to work this out?

[sfaprog]

41. Well, somebody has to "work out" Clinton's proposed change to the rules she previously agreed to

:eyes:

[MGKrebs]

43. I don't think the rules actually stipulated a specific punishment,

(unless you know something that I don't), so yeah, they DO need to "work it out".

http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/pdf2html.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fa9.g.akamai.net%2F7%2F9%2F8082%2Fv001%2Fdemocratic1.download.akamai.com%2F8082%2Fpdfs%2Fcommission%2F20050531_rulesmemo.pdf&images=yes

[Colobo]

15. I respect the rules. I'm in Florida. We don't count... big deal... Gobama!

[Robyn66]

19. Actually.....

Maybe I'm mistaken but wouldn't Obama supporters have a reason to push for a Florida and Michigan solution with his clinching the nomination so much closer than Hillary's? I mean, the number of delegates necessary would go up but he is still ahead and would still be that much further ahead if they were counted. My personal opinion is rules are rules and if they aren't stuck to this year, what is to stop chaos in the future?

[NorthCarolina]

25. Of course they wouldn't, it would be "Rules are rules"

but in reality, what else does she have to hang on too?

[butterfly77]

28. If the situation was reversed...

hillary the media and the CONS, who have been involved in our primaries since the beginning would have been pounding obama to get out of the race...

[WeDidIt]

30. IF the entire primary situation were exactly reversed

Obama would ahve been forced out in February after having lost 12 in a row.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

34. you are so wrong and your hatred of Hillary has jaded your logic

[jsmirman]

37. His logic??? There is no logic to support Hillary's insane, irrational insistence

on turning illegitimate votes into real ones. It's about as illogical as you can get.

But please, make an argument outside of the moronic, thoroughly specious "but, but, they voted!" and let's have at it.

[MGKrebs]

40. If the situation were reversed Biden would be in the lead.

Or maybe Kucinich. Depends on whether you count Texas and Idaho or not.