Rallies in DC and Throughout Florida Saturday to Protest Disenfranchisement

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 12:25pm

"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.
Florida's back in thick of Demo mess

[Bluemoon]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 12:28pm

Howard Dean will be on Meet the Press this week. I hope Russert doesn't give him the white-glove treatment.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 12:39pm

Here's an excellent Q&A on the actual DNC "Rules":

A Talking Points Memo: Rules provide for the Florida and Michigan delegations to be seated.

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 12:39 PM

[Bluemoon]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 12:42pm

Excellent points, indeed. Thanks for sharing!

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 12:52pm

Is this story true? That would depend on what the meaning of the word "IS" is.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 12:57pm

What story?

[artscallion]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:08pm

Outside of any opinions on what should or shouldn't be done regarding FL and MI, there are no civil rights involved here. Any civil right to vote applies only to the general election, where everyone gets their one vote. The primary is a private vote within a private group (party) who can make their own rules, as long as they don't violate the law.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:08pm

"TALLAHASSEE, Florida (Reuters) - Senate lawmakers in Florida have voted to ban the fake bull testicles that dangle from the trailer hitches of many trucks and cars throughout the state. Critics of the ban included the Senate Rules Chairman, Sen. Jim King, a Jacksonville Republican whose truck sported a pair until his wife protested."

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:23pm

That the DNC reserves a legal right to invalidate millions of votes is not going to go down well.

If you read the ACTUAL rules, all Howard Dean & Donna Brazile had to do was strip FL and MI of 50% of their delegates and have all the popular votes count.

THAT's the rule.

If they had done that in February, we wouldn't be in this mess now.

Their stupidity should be punished severely.

[lildogs]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:24pm

Seat Fla and Mich delegates and split their votes down the middle. Period.

[madbrian]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:25pm

For the first time in awhile, at least on this board, I agree with every syllable of a PJ post.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:25pm

Since I'm so hazy on how this all played out- what did the candidates do? Did they agree they wouldn't participate in these "Renegade primaries"?

[Auggie27]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:34pm

I must admit, I have moved 180 on this point, and cannot help but think there are too many echoes of 2000 (I know, I know, this is a primary, I get it...) in any "process" that splits hairs to eliminate, dilute or bastardize votes and in turn, disinfranchises a single voter. We are coming off 8 years of constitutional crisis from an unseemly power grab (to put it mildy). There's nothing gained in leaving two states out of the selection process, no matter what the "rules" were 6 months ago. The Democratic party will be in further crisis if Florida and Michigan aren't handled in a way that solves this to everyone's satisfaction. It would be a tainted win for Obama, and I'm an Obama supporter. From here on, we need transparancy and accountability. The nominee must be chosen in a manner that shouts INTEGRITY. I have already heard far too many people threaten to stay home. Fair and square from here on, no matter what the "rules" once were.

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 01:34 PM

[madbrian]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 1:38pm

I agree with everything you've said, but I don't know what would be a fair solution at this point. And even if I did, I can't imagine anything that both campaigns would agree to. Even then, if a reasonable solution could be found, Howard Dean would find a way to muck it up.

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:07pm

I say give it all to Clinton. She can't win with it anyways. The entire process is unfair and it kind of makes you wonder if the Democratic party has it out for itself. Nothing like pissing off Florida.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:37pm

Seat Fla and Mich delegates and split their votes down the middle. Period.

Lildogs--that period won't hold.

Millions of voters in those two states showed up and votes OVERWHELMINGLY for Clinton.

To split the delegates 50/50 is a silly suggestion. It still disenfranchises those voters.

The only solutions HAVE to tip the scale toward Clinton, AS THE VOTERS did, or the DNC must pay for new primaries.

Which will tip the scales for Clinton AGAIN.

There's no way to get around the fact the voters in those two states voted for Clinton.

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 02:37 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:39pm

Like in Michigan where Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot?

Yeah, that's fair.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:45pm

He pulled his own friggin' name off that ballot in a cynical gesture to suck up to the Iowa Dems who insisted being first.

Obama took his name off that ballot in a sleazy backroom deal that STINKS of the Old Politics he claims to eschew.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:47pm

What gives Iowa the right to be "first" anyway?

And why should their stupid need to be first trump the rights of millions of voters in two other states?

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:48pm

"There's no way to get around the fact the voters in those two states voted for Clinton."

Yes there is. When you say that Barrack's name was not even on the ballot in Michigan that should say something. Not to mention every time someone wrote-in any name they were rendered invalid.

At what point is this even fair to Obama?

[madbrian]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:48pm

"The only solutions HAVE to tip the scale toward Clinton, AS THE VOTERS did, or the DNA must pay for new primaries.

Which will tip the scales for Clinton AGAIN.

There's no way to get around the fact the voters in those two states voted for Clinton."

Now that I'm disagreeing with PJ again, I feel better. In my opinion, with respect to seating delegates, the votes in those states are meaningless. The DNC missed their chance to fix things with the gap before the PA primary; it's difficult to see any solution happening now. In my opinion, once the DNC decided that any solution had to be approved by both campaigns, it was doomed. Given the point in the campaign, there was no way there was going to be agreement. The DNC should have determined a fair approach, found the funding, and moved forward with a revote.

[lildogs]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 2:57pm

These are all delightful questions.

But they don't change the fact that his name wasn't on the ballots.

Just like they wouldn't if HER name hadn't been on it--would your opinion still be the same? Doubtful.

Do these words ring a bell: "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything"

So was she lying then or lying now?
Lady C Says It Herself

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 3:00pm

Obama pulled his own name off the ballot. Ask yourself why.

There is a formula (I don't have it handy) for figuring out what percentage of the "Uncommitted" was Obama and which was Edwards. The formula is based on the average of the polls leading up to the primary date: how many wanted Edwards and how many wanted Obama.

These are the results of the primary. Everyone but Obama and Edwards stayed on.

Hillary Clinton 328,309 (55.23%)

Dennis Kucinich 21,715 (3.65%)

Christopher Dodd 3,845 (0.65%)

Mike Gravel 2,361 (0.40%)

Uncommitted 238,168 (40.07%)

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 03:00 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 3:05pm

I have no interest in why Obama removed his name--what difference does it make?

Even Hillary said that the contests didn't count for anything.

I ask you again--was she lying then or now?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 3:13pm

You have "no interest" in it because it doesn't fit with your cherished story that everything he does is perfect.

He and Howard Dean and Donna Brazile made a cold, calculating Old School political choice in a Old School backroom deal--and it ended up backfiring on them when both states became the tie breakers.