Rallies in DC and Throughout Florida Saturday to Protest Disenfranchisement- Page 3

[javero]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 5:27pm

I didn't mean to treat this subject lightly. Howard Dean has two choices: (1)pony up and bankroll proper FL & MI primaries prior to the convention, or (2) rewrite the rules to push FL & MI to the top of the queue 2 years out in time for the next round of mid-term elections with a lottery system for placement thereafter.

The conventions were routinely brokered early in the history of both parties.

As I understand it, the DNC hasn't met it fundraising goals in this election cycle b/c the lion's share of donations have gone to the coffers of Hillary & Obama.

I believe too much harm has been done already and it's too late in the game to remedy the FL & MI situation in 08. Their delegates should be seated even if the votes are symbolic only and a deal settled prior to the start of the convention.

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 05:27 PM

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 5:34pm

And what you have now is the fact that superdelegates will have those states in their minds as belonging to Clinton when he might have taken one or both states or at least closed the gaps.

As I said in another thread, you're under the assumption that the superdelegates all see those states the same way as you. These are people who were specifically chosen by the Democratic party as the best representation of their constituents to uphold their nomination process. I would hope for the sake of the party that they have a more informed perspective on the validity of the Michigan and Florida primaries than you and PalJoey.

[javero]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 5:40pm

Let me add that in my loterry option (#2), FL & MI would get protected status for 8 years starting in 2010 with all other states/territories bidding in a auction for placements. They should be permitted to be bundled in blocks of 3 states to faciliate travel but the Super Tuesday crap must end also.

I can't see any benefit from protecting the favored-state status of IA, NH, NV and SC after this year's debacle. See section 11A of the DNC Delegate Selection Rules linked below.


Delegate Selection Rules

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 05:40 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 5:41pm

Well, of course, you feel that way. The truth of the matter doesnt help obama.

He ****ed up the revotes. They did not happen because of him. He will lose Florida in nov. She will win Florida in nov. Again.

[javero]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 5:46pm

"Well, of course, you feel that way. The truth of the matter doesnt help obama."

You obviously think as highly of me as you do of Obama LOL.

I think this year's a wash unfortunately but suggested what I think is an equitable remedy. Give FL & MI first crack at it starting in 2010 with mid-terms for 8 years. Everybody else must bid in blocks of no more than 3 because to me the Super Tuesday business is collusion too.

Politics is about compromise and bitchin' ain't compromising meaning no disrespect to the distaff posters here.

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 05:46 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 5:49pm

Look at the post times. I was talking to orange skittles.

[javero]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 5:53pm

My bad jerby!

Would option #2 meet your muster as a Floridian?

The rules are beggin' to be rewritten.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 6:04pm

Of course I'd think that, because you're just making things up that are convenient for your perspective. Unless you can find a poll where all the superdelegates were asked if they think Hillary won Florida and Michigan fairly and the majority said yes, your claim that they regard those states as "belonging" to Clinton is your (biased) opinion, not a fact.

Updated On: 4/25/08 at 06:04 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 6:26pm

well obviously not every super is going to think that. Obviously there are superdelegates for obama. They are going to weigh God knows what criteria.

But if I can't prove that supers won't count those states as hers, neither can you.

But I'm willing to bet my biased opinionated ass that many of the undecided have the same view as me. Because that's what in the tally whenever anyone looks at the numbers "incl Michigan and Florida". Because tainted or not. Accurate or not. Fair or not. Those are how the numbers stand.

But you don't like to think of Florida and michigan. And neither does obama. Obviously given the revotes we are having in those two important swing states.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 6:27pm

Obama in 30 seconds

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 7:58pm

i will only watch him when he's done in 30 seconds re-enacted by bunnies, joe.

[artscallion]

Posted: 4/25/08 at 8:01pm

PJ said: "These are the results of the primary. Everyone but Obama and Edwards stayed on."

Just to keep facts straight,

Four Democratic candidates filed affidavits with the Michigan Department of State requesting that their names be removed from Michigan's Primary ballot: Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden and John Edwards.

Four Democratic candidates remained on the Michigan ballot: Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel.

All candidates remained on the Florida ballot because Florida law only allows you to remove yourself from its ballot if you are completely removing yourself from the presidential race.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 8:05am

And the SOLE reason they removed themselves from the Michigan ballot was to suck up to the Democratic leaders in Iowa and make them feel like they had big Iowan dicks.

But none of them ever imagined that Florida and Michigan would become the tie-breakers.

And for not envisioning THAT possibility, Dean, Brazile and Obama get a nomination for Stupidest Political Gambles Ever.

I hope they lie in bed sleepless wondering if it really WAS a good thing for the Democratic Party to disenfranchise two entire states when the rules said ding them 50%.

Haven't we Democrats always been AGAINST that sort of thing not for it?

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 3:45pm

"But none of them ever imagined that Florida and Michigan would become the tie-breakers. "

They are not tie breakers. Maybe with Hillary's "math" but it's not going to work that way. That is just not possible with the way delegates are counted.

The real tie breakers (and king makers) are the super delegates.
Updated On: 4/26/08 at 03:45 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 4:44pm

in any event, we would have an accurate vote for every state and know with certainty "the will of the people" come June 4.

And I know you like to believe that that is Obama but we do not truly know and never will.

And like obama supporter, bill maher, said last night--she's losing by a hair. He said the same thing I recently said--that its not like the difference between huckabee and mccain.

So I don't really know why we keep having these debates. The supers will decide and when they do, so be it.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 5:46pm

Exactly. The fact that the difference between them in popular vote and delegates is so small and will remain so, even if/when these states are resolved satisfactorily is reason enough to dread and fear the rest of this contentious season. It's "exciting" only for MSM, because it nourishes that rabid beast. But the divisiveness really does promise a '68 schism come August. A floor fight is "good drama" for cable news, but leaves the party rife with internecine warfare, unhealed wounds, and in every way ill prepared for the post-Labor Day world. (Read the piece at Washingtonpost.com on this very matter).

[The Boy From Ohio]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 5:56pm

I've said it before, if we knew about his "crazy preacher problems" and "bitter" comments pre-Feb. 5th. we would have a Nom. Hillary. Obama would be history, or the situation would be reversed.

[DG]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 6:02pm

"The supers will decide and when they do, so be it."

I have a feeling that others might not be quite so magnanimous. Whatever the truth of the matter, there are great numbers that are going to feel 'violated' depending on how this unfolds - and some of them might have different ways of expressing their displeasure.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 6:03pm

Not if the ticket is Clinton/Obama.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 6:22pm

both sides will have much reason to be upset if their candidate doesnt get it. And there will be bitching and crying and whining galore.

But then that side has to get over it because there are bigger things at stake.

Sadly, I think a good chunk will abstain or vote for mccain. And that's sad.

I can say now that whoever does have their candidate get the nom, it would be smart not to rub it in anyone's faces. Enjoy the victory privately and then work on getting us all in the same direction.

But sadly I doubt the two sides come together sooner than later as there are some pretty needy, nasty people on both sides.

[artscallion]

Posted: 4/26/08 at 7:13pm

Jerby's right. This constant back and forth article/poll/link posting doesn't do anyone any good. And it has no effect on the results. It only deepens the rift between sides. I'm going to take this opportunity to step back from it all and just silently watch the process from here on in.

If Obama loses, I'll be silently pissed for a week, and then step up to back Clinton. If Clinton loses, I'll silently celebrate for a week and then get down to the business of making sure we win the general.

May the best person win!

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 4/27/08 at 2:32am

I'm not posting this to stir the ****. I'm posting this to further convey points made in this thread and why this is all a mess:


Real Clear Politics.com