Why on Earth Should Obama be awarded delegates from Michigan?

[kennetha]

I don't understand how he could possibly be awarded any delegates at all from Michigan. He took his name off the ballot. He did so deliberately and intentionally as part of a conscious political strategy. He wanted to undermine any claim to legitimacy of Clinton's expected win in Michigan. Sure, he urged his supporters to vote for uncommitted. So did Edwards and others. So some proportion of the delegates from Michigan should be seated as uncommitted, just as the voters voted to do.

What's wrong with honoring the votes actually cast? And what argument is there for simply awarding delegates to Obama from on high.

Oh, I know. I forgot. He's already won He "deserves" the nomination and so deserves those delegates. Hillary shouldn't have any chance to persuade the uncommitted delegates from Michigan to cast their votes for her -- the woman who actually fought to get them seated.

Nothing at all can be allowed to happen that would challenge Obama's claim to the nomination. If the Michigan delegation was seated as voted, then some of those uncommitted delegates might be persuaded to vote for Clinton at the convention. But we can't have that. Obama's already won. And the DNC should just acknowledge that well known fact. After all, TImmie, and Chrisie, and Keithie over at MSNBC and all the looney tune Obamatrons here at DU say every day that this is over and that Hillary is wrecking the party by crashing their party.


Democracy be damned. Darned that shrew Hillary for putting up a fight. She should just lay back and enjoy it. Darn her! How dare she stand up for herself? How dare she stand up for her millions of supporters? How dare she stand up for the citizens of Michigan and Florida? How dare she stand up for the principle of one person, one vote?

[SeattleGirl]

1. Um, most of the major candidates signed a pledge to take their

names off the ballot in MI. Hilary reneged on the deal and kept hers on.

What part of that do you not understand?

[kennetha]

6. Hillary didn't sign any such pledge

So she did not renege on any pledge.

[SeattleGirl]

15. Yes, she did.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/us/politics/02dems.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

http://www.docstrangelove.com/2008/03/13/hillary-clinton-and-the-pledge/

[NashVegas]

67. Where In Either of Those Stories Is There Anything About Taking Their Names Off the Ballot?

I don't see it.

[TBF]

104. Heh. Funny how facts stop them in their tracks.

[paulk]

109. ok - for those of us with reading comprehension problems,

could you point out where exactly in that "pledge" is anything about taking her name off of the ballot?

[Crunchy Frog]

133. She had her fingers crossed.

[Austin26]

157. About the Famous Pledge

The candidates signed a pledge to not campaign in MI and FL...All candidates kept that pledge except the Obamination...He broke it by running a long, very stupid TV campaign ad in FL...But then that's par for his course...

There was nothing in the pledge forbidding any of them from keeping their names on the ballot in those two states...Obamonination surely did keep his name on the FL ballot (I guess you prefer to forget that and hope we Hillary supporters do as well)...and was soundly whipped by Hillary...He took his name off the MI ballot for some underhanded reason, I've forgotten what it was, and now he's crying his empty head off...because Hilary got most of the votes in MI and most of the votes in FL.

The main point of all this is that the voters in MI and FL voted in good faith believing they actually had their constitutional voice, as all others have, only to find out that these rights clearly stated in the constitution no longer applied to them.

Anyone who still actually believes that ANY of the candidates signed a pledge to take their names off the ballot:

a. Is delusional.
b. Cannot read.
c. Cannot comprehend what they do read.
d. Will believe every word that comes out of the Obomination's purple,
restylaned lips.
e. Have blocked off (from what passes for their minds) everything but
what Obamination spouts, and he makes Dan Quayle look like
Socrates.
f. All of the above.

Did you even know that NOWHERE in your two links of which you are so proud can be found any mention at all of names ON or OFF the ballot?...Read them again, this time very slowly and carefully...

[DesEtoiles]

166. IT WAS A PLEDGE NOT TO CAMPAIGN OR PARTICIPATE -AND HILLARY IS PARTICIPATING BY CLAIMING VICTORY

[madaboutharry]

23. Where are you getting your information?

You know, you can't make stuff up as you go along just to suit your argument. All the candidates signed the pledge, Hillary included.

[kennetha]

29. It wasn't a pledge

"to remove her name from the ballot."

[SeattleGirl]

Jeebus Christ on a cracker!

Did you READ the links in my post?

IT. WAS. A. PLEDGE. PERIOD.

[Carolina]

60. Hillbots can't read, don't follow rules, deny the truth

spin lies....

[JoFerret]

90. Enjoy

.

[Carolina]

110. I am enjoying seeing her lose

as she should after her IWR vote and nasty, lying campaign!

Lemming-like Hillbots can join her for all I care. SPOILERS!

[JoFerret]

121. Oh dear Caroline

You do have a bad case.

Cheer up dearie.

[MonkeyFunk]

70. but not a pledge to remove their names from the ballot

Nobody claimed at the time that the pledge required them to remove their names. Not the candidates, not the DNC, not Howard Dean - nobody claimed that.

It's a made-up lie that they pledged to remove their names.

[Brundle_Fly]

72. the pledge stated that they understood that nothing would count.

now claiming it does is truly, so. very. lame.

[Exilednight]

102. Are you going to argue the meaning of "participate" again? .....

We've been over this before and the wording plainly says that they would not "participate".

An olympic runner who doesn't participate in the 100m dash doesn't bother to line up in the blocks and walk to the finish line and claim victory and then demand their medal.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

149. *

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

106. AFAIK... it was a pledge not to campaign...

...not a pledge to remove one's name from the ballot. Not that it matters, since this argument is silly anyway.

[Exilednight]

119. It was also a pledge not to participate in any election process .......

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules, pledge to actively campaign in the pre-approved early states Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina. I 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 (any date prior to February 5, 2008). Campaigning shall include but is not limited to purchasing media or campaign advocacy of any kind, attending or hosting events of more than 200 people to promote one’s candidacy for a preference primary and employing staff in the state in question. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

172. your argument is silly and pointless

[pampango]

38. True. It was a pledge not to "participate" and left the parsing of that word

to each individual candidate. (Are you "participating" if your name remains on the ballot, but you don't campaign, or does such a pledge require one to try to get removed from the ballot? It depends on the definition of "participate".)

[Exilednight]

120. There is no parsing ........

You do not vow to run the 100m dash and then line up in the blocks and stroll to victory and then demand your gold medal.

[CTLawGuy]

143. it HAS to include conduct other than campaigning

because they wouldn't have included the word "participating" next to "campaigning" if they JUST meant campaigning. Putting your name on the ballot is a totally reasonable interpretation of "participating". It's debatable whether merely having your name on the ballot is necessarily "participating", but removal of one's name is a reasonable interpretation of the text.

[grantcart]

49. "participate"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.

[DesEtoiles]

167. IT WAS A PLEDGE NOT TO CAMPAIGN OR PARTICIPATE -AND HILLARY IS PARTICIPATING BY CLAIMING VICTORY

[grantcart]

48. not campaign or participate

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.

[my3boyz]

54. Yeah, right! Try again! nt

[Andy823]

113. Making that comment

Show just how uninformed you really are, or that you are nothing more than a troll. Which one is it?

[NotThisTime]

114. They like to ignore the rules AND the facts...

[Secret_Society]

134. did not say "take name of ballot" or anything that clearly signals that

[DesEtoiles]

165. So there are ZERO people in MI who wanted Obama? What a load of SHIT.

[Little Star]

168. BULLSHIT, MAJOR BULL SHIT, EDUCATE YOURSELF. NT

[cali]

2. Hillary should be given NO delegates from MI if Obama isn't. She lied and cheated.

She pledged not to participate. Leaving her name on the ballot is de facto evidence of participation.

You deranged hillybots believe that queen war goddess hillykins is entitled to lie and cheat.

[JVS]

3. Because a lot of people made sure to vote for the "Not Hillary" option

[kennetha]

4. Not Hillary

at this point may mean Obama. But it didn't then. And the delegates have to be seated in accordance with the vote. Uncommitted means uncommitted. Period.

[cali]

8. bzzzzt. YOU have no say whatsoever. tough.

it's up to the RBC. Get ready to weep.

[purji]

123. when I voted uncommitted it meant Obama .

If Obama gets zero in Mi. I will sue the democratic party and Hillary.

[MattBaggins]

164. So subtract the

"not Hillary" from the "for Hillary". Give her what is left over then.

[billybob537]

5. Cue: "the Twilight Zone Theme"

It's over
Projecting Clinton's slippery tactics on to Obama is truly Rovian.
But it wont work
BA_BYE HILLARY.

[kennetha]

10. Obama is the Rovian one.

He's the one who used petition challenges to ensure that he had no competitors in his first race for public office. He challenged perfectly legitimate petitions where the voter had printed their names rather than write their names in cursive. The printed name didn't count as a "signature" but he knew full well that he was challenging perfectly legitimate voters.

A man of real principle. Yeah right, He'll do anything to win. He is nothing but raw ambition parading as a moralizing saint.

You've been utterly taken in, but I haven't.

[cali]

14. and we know what hillypoo and billyboy did to their political adversaries

they hounded them to the ground, hiring sleazy people like Pellicano.

She has the principles of a slug.

You've been utterly taken in by hillypoo. I haven't.

[JoFerret]

93. Oooo. We have an innocent

in the world of politics.
Not taken in.

Oh dear.
Oh well.
never mind.
Worse things happen at sea
(than the inevitable cruel disappointments of political worship)

[SeattleGirl]

19. No, you are the one with scales over your eyes.

And if you want to see raw ambition, take a look at Hilary Clinton. THAT'S raw ambition.

[kennetha]

25. Hmm

You want to talk about raw ambition. Let's see Obama's a guy who has always been looking for the higher office after what just three years in any given office after having accomplished almost nothing in the previous office? He gets in the Senate, does almost nothing, looks in the mirror and says "I should be president of the US." Why exactly? Because he gives a good speech, I guess. I can't find a single thing that prepares him to for that office, to tell you the truth. And if I could stand to vote for a non-democrat -- which I've never done -- or stand to sit out an election -- which I've also never done -- I would. As it is, I will vote for the guy, if he is nominated. But it will be with 0 enthusiasm.

[SeattleGirl]

30. And what makes Hilary Clinton so qualified?

That she is married to Bill Clinton?

Sorry, but being the spouse of a President doesn't make one qualified to hold that office.

[kennetha]

35. For one thing

Hillary has actually worked her butt off in the Senate. She's a workhorse. Obama is a show horse. He hasn't even held a hearing of the subcommittee he chairs on Afghanistan. Hillary is about six times the Senator OBama is and would be about 20 times the president.

Plus Hillary wasn't just first lady. She played a major role in the fight for healthcare. We lost that one. Be she learned a lot from fighting. What major fight about any pressing national issue has Obama taken part in?

He gave a speech against the war. That's about it.

[SeattleGirl]

39. Oh bullshit!

Obama has done more than "give a speech."

From Wikipedia:

Legislation

Consistent with his interests in conservation, Obama voted in favor of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Obama took an active role in the Senate's drive for improved border security and immigration reform. In 2005, he cosponsored the "Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act" introduced by Republican John McCain of Arizona.<48> He later added three amendments to the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act", which passed the Senate in May 2006, but failed to gain majority support in the House of Representatives.<49> In September 2006, Obama supported a related bill, the Secure Fence Act, authorizing construction of fencing and other security improvements along the United States–Mexico border.<50> President Bush signed the Secure Fence Act into law in October 2006, calling it "an important step toward immigration reform."<51>
Senate bill sponsors Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Obama discussing the Coburn–Obama Transparency Act
Senate bill sponsors Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Obama discussing the Coburn–Obama Transparency Act<52>

Partnering with Republican Senators Richard Lugar of Indiana and then Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Obama successfully introduced two initiatives bearing his name. "Lugar-Obama" expanded the Nunn-Lugar cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons, including shoulder-fired missiles and anti-personnel mines.<53> The "Coburn-Obama Transparency Act" authorized the establishment of USAspending.gov, a web search engine launched in December 2007 and run by the Office of Management and Budget.<54> After Illinois residents complained of waste water contamination by a neighboring nuclear plant, Obama sponsored legislation requiring plant owners to notify state and local authorities of radioactive leaks.<55> A compromise version of the bill was subsequently blocked by partisan disputes and later reintroduced.<56> In December 2006, President Bush signed into law the "Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act," marking the first federal legislation to be enacted with Obama as its primary sponsor.<57>

In January 2007, Obama worked with Democrat Russ Feingold of Wisconsin to eliminate gifts of travel on corporate jets by lobbyists to members of Congress and require disclosure of bundled campaign contributions under the "Honest Leadership and Open Government Act," which was signed into law in September 2007.<58> He introduced S. 453, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections, including fraudulent flyers and automated phone calls, as witnessed in the 2006 midterm elections.<59> Obama's energy initiatives scored pluses and minuses with environmentalists, who welcomed his sponsorship with McCain of a climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050, but were skeptical of his support for a bill promoting liquefied coal production.<60> Obama also introduced the "Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007," a bill to cap troop levels in Iraq, begin phased redeployment, and remove all combat brigades from Iraq before April 2008.<61>

Later in 2007, Obama sponsored an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges, and calling for an official review following reports that the procedure had been used inappropriately to reduce government costs.<62> He sponsored the "Iran Sanctions Enabling Act" supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry, and joined Republican Chuck Hagel of Nebraska in introducing legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism.<63><64> A provision from the Obama-Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.<64> Obama also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program providing one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.<65>.

Obama and Richard Lugar visit a Russian mobile launch missile dismantling facility.<66>

Not that you'll let facts get in your way or anything.

:eyes:

[earth mom]

128. Wasn't Obama detainted on that trip to Russia?

Time for my hat. :tinfoilhat:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2042961

[Window]

59. You, like Hillary, are so full of shit it's not funny.

[Carolina]

66. worked her BUTT off.... LOL

that's a joke right?!

Spin all you want. I wish I'd seen her fight Bush the way she has fought Obama!

But no, she voted IWR, Patriot Act, Bankruptcy Bill, blah, blah, blah... some fight.

[Girlieman]

76. Walmart and Corporate fixer

That's what Hilary was doing for 25 years before she got into politics. She's simply a republican, like her husband.

[ampad]

108. She worked her ass off

To make sure she lived up to her good buddy saying she had three testicles by trying to be a war hawk, how that work our for her? She is lazy and incompetent. Anyone who would sign a war resolution without reading everything on said resolution is not a fucking workhorse. She is an opportunist that signed a document for war then sat on her ass and made a long ass speech about our "safety' Hell, why am I arguing with someone who thinks Obama is in big, big trouble because he pissed off the Catholic league. You aren't even worth the trouble. I have a feeling when this is all over your sorry ass will be eating a pizza.

[Girlieman]

73. Well it does in Pakistan and other advanced democracies

[alteredstate]

34. This little rant has nothing to do with the OP.

[earthlover]

21. So do we now favor russia style "elections" with one name on the ballot?

In the name of "counting all the votes"? Something is wrong with this picture! Namely the fact that not all the candidates were on the ballot in MI and furthermore those that were on the ballot were in violation of the agreement! So, should Obama be punished for following the rules and removing his name from the ballot, something Hillary should also have done but didn't?

[kennetha]

26. If a candidate

TAKES HIS OWN NAME OFF THE BALLOT, he's foresaken any claims to the votes cast in the relevant election.

Obama isn't the victim here. He did this to himself.

[SeattleGirl]

33. And Hilary agreed to the same thing, and then didn't follow through.

And that makes her honorable how?

[pampango]

64. In the "bizarro" world, yes it does.

You agree not to participate and that the votes won't count for anything. You also know that you are ahead in the polls, as she was in most states when the primaries began, so you are sure to win them if there is no campaigning.

You win favor with the party and Iowa and New Hampshire by agreeing not to participate in Michigan and Florida, but you are politically smart enough to know that you can play the "count the votes" card, if you need those states later on. :)

[fed_up_mother]

146. Excellent response!

[grantcart]

55. that is not true he was compling with the pledge to 'not Participate'

Only Clinton and Dodd remained on the ballot while all of the other candidates took or tried to take their name off.


THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.



In Florida Candidates cannot put their name on or off the ballot as per state law that gives the Secretary State exclusive power to do so.

[sunnystarr]

71. Actually in FL if you aren't on the primary ticket you can't be on

the GE ticket. So none of the candidates could remove their name and be on the ticket in November.

[grantcart]

79. That is not true. There is no way that the State could keep somebody that

was chosen by compromise at a contested convention and did not participate in the primaries off the ballot. A number of third party candidates never participate in the primary and they are on the general.

The law requires the Secretary of State to include all candidates that he/she may judge to be a viable candidate whether or not the candidate is declared or undeclared and whether or not the person wishes their name on the ballot.

Candidates do not put or take their name off the ballot - it is the sole resonsibility of the Secretary of State and that person must be as inclusive as possible.

[sunnystarr]

171. beats me I'm just repeating what I heard on MSNBC lol (nt)

[Window]

63. And, if a candidate says, "Everyone knows it doesn't matter. These votes won't

count for anything," what the hell does that mean???

[Blarch]

47. idiot.

[Kittycat]

77. Are you from IL? If not, STFU because you have no idea how politics works here.

The person kicked off of the ballot was cheating, and thought they could get away with it because they do that all the time here. God forbid he hold them to the damn rules. So you and Hillary, toting her Rove Maps, can fuck off.

[rodeodance]

7. Obama should not receive any. He choose to remove his name. No one forced him to do so.

[cali]

11. hillykins lied and cheated. She shouldn't get a single delegate out of MI

Leaving your name on the ballot is de facto evidence of participation. She pledged not to participate. She lied and cheated.

And get ready to cry. The RBC will not reward hillykins for her disgusting lying.

[rodeodance]

56. take a break cali and settle down

[berni_mccoy]

61. Glad to see you have not completely abandoned DU rodeo.

[Brundle_Fly]

83. he only pledged to have completely abandoned

DU.

[here_is_to_hope]

105. An enforced break maybe, like a suspension for being a....

well, you know....

[grantcart]

52. The pledge was to "not participate" and thats why all of the candidates except

Clinton and Dodd took or tried to take their name off.


THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.



In Florida Candidates cannot put their name on or off the ballot as per state law that gives the Secretary State exclusive power to do so.

[CTLawGuy]

144. no one forced FL and MI to hold primaries early

now did they?

[FlyingSquirrel]

9. The fact of the matter is,

you're right. He shouldn't be "awarded" any delegates - and neither should Clinton. They both played politics with the situation, (they are politicians after all), but the election was not valid.

So neither one should be awarded any delegates. Which has basically been the position of the DNC all along.

In reality they should have just penalized them half their delegates and allowed campaigning to occur - but they didn't so we have to deal with the aftermath.

Neither one should be "awarded" any delegates; they should change the penalty to 1/2 of the delegates and let all those voting delegates vote they way they choose to vote - as per the rules which states that even pledged delegates can change their vote. In deciding whether Clinton has any chance at all to win the nomination (and therefore stay in the race), it should be assumed for the sake of argument that she wins all the delegates in MI - all 64 of them. And the Superdelegates should be stripped from that state.

Hillary taking 64 delegates in MI is not gonna change the race at this point. So go ahead, make our day.

[WeDidIt]

12. Because the results of tthe beauty contest Michigan held are ILLEGITIMATE

[LaurenG]

13. How on earth can anyone be awarded any?

I think it's getting pretty funny around here. No one was supposed to get any. What happened to that?

If you sneakily try to get your way you will eventually get caught. Why not play by the rules and then see what happens?

There will be gnashing of teeth today for those unwilling to compromise.

[kennetha]

17. DO you want to have a convention where

when the roll call of states is taken, Michigan and Florida are just deleted? That's what would happen if Michigan and Florida got no delegates. This isn't about a squabble between the DNC and the Michigan Democratic Party. It's about the voters and their right to be heard.

We need Florida and Michigan voters energized in November. We don't need them feeling dissed and left out.

[SeattleGirl]

22. Then they need to yell at their own state's party's and not at

Obama. He wasn't in on their decision; he agreed to stand down because of it. So did Hilary, until she didn't, at least in MI.

[LaurenG]

24. Like I said, why not play by the rules and see what happens

rather then try to scam your way in? It's silly and reflective of the immaturity (and in my opinion dishonesty) of those who refused to play it the way it was decided.

Cheating your way to the top is so 2004. How about some integrity and enough confidence in yourself to do the right thing openly?

[Carolina]

84. YES! They broke the rules

Hillary had a sizable (13/30) contingent of representatives on the rules committee and they ALL agreed to the rules. As did she.

It's that simple.

Fuck Florida, it has screwed up elections since 2000 and likely before. Same for Michigan -- changed the primary date knowing the consequences! Accept the consequences. I bet these same folks would say d

My apologies to reasonable people in Florida and Michigan.

[sellitman]

89. It was too late to count their votes when Hillary agreed to it.

Just because she is loosing gives her no right to suddenly decide the votes should count.

That is called CHEATING.

I'm surprised you could condone this.

[SoCalDem]

170. Yup Let Florida AND Michigan have a FULL delegation at the convention...BUT

They get a special buffet
Free valet parking
Front row seats

But they do NOT cast votes..

and no Super delegates from EITHER state get to cast a vote..

They LOST the delegation "right" when they BLATANTLY DEFIED the rules..gloated about it..bragged about it...and were thrown under the bus by HILLARY ...UNTIL she lost the whole shebang on March 4..

ONLY AFTER she realized that she had lost, did she suddenly become Suffragette-Hillary... WhitePower-Hillary... Gas-Tax Hillary... Hillbilly-Hillary.... Gun-Moll HIllary... Assassin-Hillary..

The Poor dear is grasping at straws, and it sure looks and smells like flop sweat to me :)

[Higher Standard]

16. What a silly argument

So, apparently every Democratic candidate who took his name off the Michigan ballot did so to cast a doubt of legitimacy on Hillary's expected win? They likely expected that Hillary's name was going to be removed, as well, so it's hard to accept that line of reasoning. Additionally, the DNC had already made it's ruling on Michigan and the candidates had already signed to to participate in the primary process there, so ANY result had a shroud of illegitimacy over it by definition.

THe issue with giving Hillary delegates based on the cote that happened is that, contrary to the arguments that she pus forth, the results of the primary clearly did not reflect the will of the electorate in Michigan. There were only a few Democratic nominees still on the ballot for President. The voters already knew their primary was not going to count towards the nomination, so some likely voters did not go to the polls and others may have cast their votes in a way they normally wouldn't have had they suspected there would ever have been legitimacy returned to that vote. Assuming that all Obama, Edwards, etc. likely voters showed up and voted Uncommitted is a stretch, even if there was any encouragement from the campaigns to do that. Even if there was that encouragement, since there was no campaigning in Michigan, it couldn't have been strongly overt encouragement and may not have brought out their potential voters in any meaningful way.

The point is, there are far too many issues regarding the vote that did occur to associate any interpretation of the word "fair" to the notion of seating their delegates fully based on those results.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

18. A joke, right?

If you're trying to be funny by pretending to be a Hillary supporter and using spurious logic to make a point, I'm not seeing the payoff in laughs. The sentence, "What's wrong with honoring the votes actually cast?" suggests to me that this is a satire of some kind, because it begs the obvious question, "What's wrong with honoring the terms agreed to by the candidates?" You do sometime see equally ridiculoud arguments presented seriously, but these are usually accompanied by telltale Freeper spelling and grammar errors.

[terip64]

20. Because I live there and voted uncommitted and my vote should count for something. n/t

[ecdab]

27. The people of Michigan were told their votes wouldn't count.

The candidates were told that votes cast for them wouldn't count.

Seating delegates from Michigan is going to be done as a consideration to the people of Michigan - not to Obama or to Hillary. The seating of delegates from Michigan should have absolutely nothing to do with a straw poll that was taken in January which featured the name of one viable candidate on the ballot.

The idea that Hillary is defending the principle of one person, one vote is laughable. All she is doing is trying to make sure she gets unequal representation by counting a contest that voters and the candidates were all told wouldn't count and only she participated in.

The idea that counting votes in a contest that featured one viable name on the ballot and that voters were told that voting in that contest was meaningless is some how an expression of democracy is beyond laughable.

You are confusing the idea of trying to mitigated the impact of the political choices made by the Michigan party leaders upon the people of Michigan with the idea of trying to give Hillary delegates based upon a straw poll.

[indimuse]

28. According to the ROOOLZ....

He Shouldn't!!!

[Higher Standard]

32. According to the rules

Neither should she. Glad to see you're taking a logical view on this.

[onenote]

78. y'know, your last "roolz" thread was thoroughly debunked

Maybe you forgot.

[Guava Jelly]

31. BECAUSE HE WASN"T ON THE FUCKING BALLOT AND SHE WASN"T SUPPOSED TO BE EITHER

Jesus fucking christ.

This by any means necessary is getting a bit tiresome

[quaker bill]

36. The people voted

their votes were counted. Unfortunately, Michigan chose to hold no contest between the candidates that qualified for convention delegates. One can only reasonably interpret this as the state's decision to not be represented at the convention. We should honor their choice.

Had they been truly interested in having representatives at the convention, there were some simple and plainly stated rules to follow. I am quite sure that they are sufficiently skilled to have done it.

[gristy]

97. Yes. Well put.

Remarkable how kennetha and others just don't get it. They'll probably never get it

[polichick]

37. A four-year-old could figure out that Clinton's position is absurd.

[SeattleGirl]

40. Perhaps the OP is only three.

:eyes:

[polichick]

43. Lol - Hillary's position: "All for me and none for you!"

[SeattleGirl]

46. Exactly!

Or, "Mine, mine, MINE!!"

[mamalone]

41. UMMMM.... maybe because there are Obama supporters in Michigan?

And maybe because they deserve to be represented?

[insanity]

42. She is trying to play this like she is the matyr for democracy

When she signed the same pledge honoring to remove any legitimacy from the elections in Fl and Mi.

As a pragmatic thing, I think the delegation should be halfed and the supers stripped. As long as the people who voted not hillary get their voice heard I'm happy.

[Hamlette]

44. No delegates from FL or MI should be seated. NOT ONE. Not pledged, not supers.

I've had it. Hillary agreed to play by the rules when we started this game and she has done nothing but. She has demeaned another democrat then when it became obvious he was going to win, she has done EVERYTHING to delegitimize him, the process and the party by this bullshit about FL and MI.

And you people wonder why she is despised.

Poor little Hillary. She's a girl so everyone should be nice to her and give her everything she wants.

She ran a horrible campaign based on hubris and, to top it all off, some people don't like liars. Imagine that. They voted for the other guy.

I hope the committee takes both states out. Nothing. No votes. FU

[CatsDogsBabies]

45. Because under normal circumstances he would have received votes

Why should HRC get votes when this would mean she broke the rules?

[dems_rightnow]

50. I'm baffled

by anyone who makes the argument that a legitimate election was held in Michigan, and that Obama somehow got skunked.

Seriously, listen to yourself say that and see if it makes sense.

[Hola]

51. Simple

If Clinton can get delegates from an unauthorized and unrecognized election, then Obama should to. Fair is Fair.

If Clinton wasn't demanding delegates for herself, there wouldn't be a problem.

[my3boyz]

53. Why on earth should Hillary be awarded delegates? Afterall, she said the state did not "count" and

she signed an agreement.

[frickaline]

57. Let me ask you a question

Do you honestly believe that there exists no supporters of Obama in Michigan? Do you believe this vote to fairly represent the will of the people? Can you find polling data to show that not one single voter would have voted for Obama? Your claim is so far off the deep end, you're drowning.

[intaglio]

58. Hillary as this Atheist sees her

[IsItJustMe]

62. You're arguements are false, That's why she will fail. People see through it, no matter how it is

spun. Not everyone is ignorant.

[leeroysphitz]

65. You're right. Obama is an idiot. If he really cared about the voters of Michigan

he would have cheated like Hillary.

[greguganus]

68. It doesn't matter. Hillary is toast. n/t

[bowens43]

69. only a complete moron would believe that hillary

should get delegates from a state where there was no contest. Hillary is a whiny, sniveling shrew who didn't give a flying fuck about the voters of Michigan until it became apparent that she was getting her silly ass kicked.

Don't you dare try to pretend that she is standing up for principle. Hillary has no principles. She is is as dishonest and unethical as they come. Only fools are fooled by her ridiculous rhetoric.

[Barack_America]

74. Because people in Michigan cast ballots for him.

Go to CNN and look at the exit polls from Michigan, there you will see that a majority of "uncommitted" ballots were cast in lieu of being able to vote for Obama directly.

These people were effectively voting for Obama. Their votes should be honored.

[fujiyama]

140. Exactly

but many, like my friends and my sister did not bother driving in freezing temperatures to vote for "uncommitted". I can guarantee my sister and several friends would have gone out on the other hand, to vote for Obama.

[onenote]

75. Over and over and over you demonstrate that you don't know what you're talking about

Its simply incredible how consistently misinformed (or dishonest) you are in your posts.

The candidates signed a pledge not to "participate" in the MI primary. Without getting too Clintonian in your definitional skills, tell me what that was supposed to mean.

[PolNewf]

80. Remember 2000 and voter intent? nt

[GoesTo11]

81. Why on earth should any delegates be awarded from Michigan

The election was held under the assumption that no delegates would be awarded, so voters weren't making their preferences for delegate selection known. This was a mess as soon as that happened. So the point isn't cleaning it. It's moving forward. Since Obama is going to be the nominee, we should do what helps him win. If that means throwing Hillary a freakin' bone here and letting her claim a moral victory with a few unearned delegates, so be it. If it means pretending that Michigan has a say after it's all decided so its party leaders can party in Denver and support the ticket, so be it. But because of how things have already played out through January, there is no way there can be a real democratic solution to what happened there.

[atufal1c]

82. The whole "name on the ballot" thing is a red herring.

According to Hillary Clinton herself, the primary in Michigan wouldn't count.

Unless you can get past that statement, it doesn't matter WHOSE name was or wasn't on the ballot.

And you can't.

And can I just say how much I love the way some Hillary supporters have started referring to previously established and agreed-up rules and processes as "rooolz", like some 6th grade teenyboppers?

I expect there will be whole books written on the damage that HRC's campaign has done to feminism in this country.

[HooptieWagon]

85. Bullshit

He removed his name from the ballot in response to a request by the DNC, and signed a pledge to that effect. Why should he be penalized for complying with the rules? hillary refused to remove her name from the ballot, despite signing the same pledge that she would. Why should hillary be rewarded for breaking the rules?

[Yossariant]

86. He feels entitled --- even though he wasn't on the ballot! What a moran!

:shrug:

[Celebration]

88. Entitlement?

Well, then, the whole idea that any votes from Michigan should count should be dropped. Hillary feels entitled to votes from a contest that she admits didn't count. What a moran!

[sellitman]

87. Neither should count.

If another country had an election were not everyone was on the ballot or where no one could campaign. Would we recognize it?

No Effin way, but Hillary wants these to count.

She sounds like a Tin Pot Dictator more than a Democrat and your support of this sham is pathetic.

[Stop Cornyn]

91. The question is why on Earth should anyone be awarded delegates from Michigan? They had a straw poll

instead of a primary, and now Hillary wants to assign delegates based on a straw where she was the only key participant.

[LibGranny]

92. Because members of her staff agreed that her name

would not be on the ballot and then slyly added it anyway. Obama should get at least 1/2 half those delegates. It's another occasion of HRC's camp "moving the goalposts".

[mudesi]

94. What is wrong with you?

Are you a fascist, a troll, what?

[GoldieAZ49]

95. He shouldn't get any from MI

why would he want any?

[billyoc]

96. He shouldn't.

That primary didn't count.

[Tim4319]

98. So, punish Obama for following the rules?

[breakaleg]

99. Hillary no more deserves any delegates than he does. I agree he should get none and neither should

she.

His name wasn't on the ballot because the DNC set the rules. Those rules should be followed.

[against all enemies]

100. Why should illegally obtained evidence be removed from a trial?

[Faryn Balyncd]

101. And . . . "Why on Earth Should (Rule-Breaking) HILLARY be awarded delegates from Michigan?"

[kid a]

103. nevermind...

[ShadowLiberal]

107. There's no reason to keep uncommitted delegates as uncommitted

The people who voted uncommitted were clearly saying they did not want Hillary as the nominee.

Allowing Hillary and anyone else who was on the ballot the chance to get the uncommitted delegates is like having an election with one guy running for some office against another person who jumped in too late to get on the ballot, with the question "should be elected senator". And then when "no" wins saying "well the no's didn't say who they want, so they should all remain uncommitted, rather then their votes going to the guy who wasn't on the ballot that ran against me".

[krispos42]

111. Why should any candidate get any delegates from Michigan?

If Hillary gets any, then Obama must get some as well. As long as we're ignoring the breaking of rules and all that.

[beac]

135. You know, now that I think about it...

I would like some delegates!

If I had some delegates, then maybe they could run errands and walk the dogs while I fritter away hours here.

Why don't we ALL call up the DNC and demand that delegates be sent out to do DU members' laundry for the next month. That makes about as much sense as Hillary's demands and, frankly, would be more useful to the party than her endless whining.

[krispos42]

158. I want MY delegate to be a masseuse

I can do my own laundry, but I can't massage my own back!

:rofl:

[beac]

159. If they don't give you your masseuse, they'll just be stabbing you in the back-rub!

You are just demostrating your "hot stones" by lying down for what's right, after all. ;)

[krispos42]

160. I'll have to take it all the way to the convention!!!

Never give up! Never surrender!

[beac]

163. Just be prepared for the mean and evil masseusinists who will say

you are full of Shiatsu!

[Orangepeel]

112. A deliberate political strategy based on the system the DNC set up, which meant that MI didn't count

The proper thing is to have the delegates not count.

If the system is being changed, it can be changed to reflect the part of Clinton's argument for why it doesn't matter that she was the only major candidate on the ballot -- that "her opponent" campaigned to have his voters vote uncommitted.

[papapi]

115. There are no Michigan delegates. So nobody can TAKE them.

Michigan delegates is a myth.

[OzarkDem]

116. Agree, no way to determine voter intent

and that is key to ensuring a fair election.

[Gore1FL]

117. Why should anyone get delegates?

It was either an election that counted or it wasn't. This was deemed by everyone to be an election that didn't count.

[sfam]

118. You're right. NOBODY should be awarded delegates from Michigan...it shouldn't count

At all.

[themaguffin]

122. why on earth should an invalid contest count AT ALL?

[PseudoIntellect]

124. Why should Hillary be awarded any, by that logic?

She said clearly that "it didn't make any difference whether or not my name was on the ballot."

In that case, she deserves zero, since she didn't care whether or not voters had an opportunity to voice their opinions. "you know, it's clear that this election they're having isn't going to count for anything."

But that doesn't sound fair. And neither does the other argument.

[Poll_Blind]

125. Because you're on my ignore list now? n/t

PB

[Vinca]

126. How have you managed to get into Obama's head to know

his "conscious political strategy?" I live in New Hampshire and I had no idea if his name was on the Michigan ballot or not and it didn't matter to me one way or the other. People who say he was pandering to my state and Iowa are absolutely wrong. He took his name off the ballot because the ELECTION WAS NOT GOING TO COUNT. Rules are being changed after the fact and if you call that democracy, I've got a few banana republics you might like to move to.

[AtomicKitten]

127. She is hyping this so morons will carry her water and argue why she is above the rules.

And in that respect, well done. The only problem is that your argument doesn't hold water and is the antithesis of democracy and fair play.

[beac]

129. Why didn't she "stand up" when they orginally set the rules???

Why did she say that the FL and MI primaries would be "irrelevant" at that time and ONLY start to care about them when she was losing?

I say, how DARE she go on trying to bamboozle voters that this is about them and not HER.

[Faygo Kid]

130. No profile. Of course. Another carefully scripted Hillbot here on DU.

I respect the hell out of the mods, but they let this kind of anonymous trash infest DU, and as a long-time member, I am annoyed as hell that it continues.

[Patsy Stone]

131. Riddle me this:

How does leaving your name on the ballot equal "not participating"?

[Crunchy Frog]

132. Why on Earth should ANYBODY be awarded delegates from Michigan

when it was agreed beforehand by everybody that the election was not binding and would not count. Hillarhoids don't understand the concept of following agreed upon rules and procedures.

[hokies4ever]

136. Why on earth should Hillary be awarded delegates from Michigan?

"Democracy be damned." She knew it wouldn't count! :rofl:

[Median Democrat]

137. Here's Hillary's Answer To Your Question

The question is whether Michigan should receive any delegates as noted by Hillary Clinton in October 2007:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101100859_pf.html

"Michigan is tentatively slated to send 156 delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention, but national party officials have threatened to take away those delegates if the state persists in holding its primary on Jan. 15.

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio's call-in program, "The Exchange."

[Pisces]

138. No should be given any delegates period. The rules are the rules.

[livetohike]

139. The first good answer in this thread

:toast:

[CTLawGuy]

141. Why on Earth should Michigan be awarded any delegates?

I don't understand how they could possibly be awarded any delegates at all in Michigan. They broke the rules. They did so deliberately and intentionally as part of a conscious political strategy. They wanted to undermine the DNCs predetermined primary schedule to get more attention.

[VotesForWomen]

142. who needs MI and FL? O's gonna win UT, WY, SC, GA etc. he'll kick ass!! nt

[fed_up_mother]

145. Even if we concede it was political strategy

The strategy was this:

We can't campaign in the state, so I don't get to make my case for president. Therefore, I am taking my name off the ballot because Hillary has an unfair advantage. The people of Michigan have known her for a lot longer. This would be an unfair advantage for Hillary.

Got it? Elections are first about FAIRNESS.

[PolNewf]

147. Michigan was not a legitimate Primary n/t

[Bolo Boffin]

148. "He wanted to undermine any claim to legitimacy of Clinton's expected win in Michigan."

Well, why hasn't he pursued the same strategy in other states Clinton was expected to win? Please don't be silly.

[Jersey Devil]

150. How are you this fine day Mr Ickes

Glad to have you aboard at DU. What an honor!

[trueblue2007]

151. I don't think OBAMA should get ANY voted from Michigan

he took his name off!!!


HE did it.

[rocktivity]

152. Because the primary was not sanctioned by the DNC

The only fair thing to do is split the delegates 50/50 and not have a winner.

:headbang:
rocknation

[ProSense]

153. Because 22 of the 55

have already pledged to him, and the others will most likely

It's still over.

[kevinbgoode]

154. Are you another visiting Republican?

Where the f*ck have you been?

[chascarrillo]

155. Why on earth should people who wrote in Obama's name in MI not be counted?

[cbc5g]

156. They broke DNC rules, maybe FL and MI voters should vote in competent people? n/t

[quaker bill]

161. Michigan has delegates?

I heard they had all been stripped for intentional non-compliance with party timing rules. As it stands Michigan has no delegates to award to anyone. After Carl Levin's testimony, it is clear that Michigan moved with full intent to violate the rules and it took the will of the democratic house and the democratic governor's signature to accomplish it.

They applied for the "early" window, got turned down in a democratic process, that apparently took most of a year of meetings, then went ahead and did it anyway. Such flagrant non-compliance should not be awarded any delegates. On the other hand, as zero to zero is the same as 64 to 64, or 32 to 32, why not go with a compromise that at least allows them to attend?

[TahitiNut]

169. Exactly. In even mouthing the words "Michigan delegates" people are lying.

They just don't fucking exist.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6159157

[Auntie Bush]

162. Yeah, how dare her for busting up OUR Obama party.

She's just selfish and is in it for herself....so I've been told...many, many times. I'm almost ready to believe it but then I remember the millions who want her to win and she's trying to grant their wishes and dreams of a first woman president. But that selfish B said something negative about my Obama. Why oh why is she in this race?...get out now!
and get off this site before you're tombstoned.

[On the Road]

173. OK. Let's Say the Remaining Delegates are Selected as "Ucommited"

delegates and represent the voters who cast their ballots that way. Would that be preferable to you?