Nothing is fair about Florida and Michigan
 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24890836/
I agree 100%, the DNC should sit Florida's delegates but not Michigans. I really like Governor Crist's stance on the issue, basically that Florida taxpayers already funded one legitimate primary and that the DNC should either seat the delegates or pay for another election with their own funds.

^^^Thank you. I actually will agree with you this ONE time. Never again though. lol.

One of my friends is at the Democratic meeting right now (albeit in the rafters). I've been getting emails from his blackberry all morning.

This whole thing is such a clusterfudge...

As do I, strange thing....lol! I have changed my stance on the Florida election probably because I am so sick of the hoop la that is going on! Seat the Florida delegates, Hillary did win even though Obama didn't campaign and she did!
He wasn't even on the ballot in MI!!!!! That is just not right to count the delegates there!

I have been watching this most of the day.

The Obama camp's suggestion to just split the Michigan delegates 50-50 is easily the most bizarre and silly proposal- but the others all seem fairly well thought out, even though I think they are an attempt to fix something that is already irreparably messed up.

Whatever happens, I really think Florida and Michigan will get identical treatment. Obama did voluntarily remove his name from the ballot in Michigan. There was no requirement he do so, and it proved to be a very foolish move though at the time maybe there was a good strategy behind it.

The really screwy thing here is that if Florida and Michigan are reinstated fully, Hillary gets to claim the popular vote ONLY on the basis that all the Michigan uncommitted votes are considered just that. Assume those are for Obama, which presumably just about all of them are, and then Obama wins the popular vote still. But then Hillary gets to come back and claim that doesn't really matter since he took his name off the ballot etc. etc. etc.

This is a real mess. Unless they take this to convention and both these candidates end up on the same ticket (Barack for President and Hillary for VP), then I do not see the party uniting for the election and swing voters going Democratic.

The one thing this whole process has shown however is just how much the DNC power structure can control and manipulate the nominee through super-delegates, caucuses and now maybe inventing a final vote tally in primaries that were declared invalid before they took place. Contrast this with the Republican Party system which has no tiered selection processes or super-delegates.

It is more than a little amusing to see all this exposed in the party that is still screaming about Florida in 2000 and claiming the election was stolen, and that voters were disenfranchised despite all the massive recounts and legal processes which supported the actual outcome.

As a Michigander who voted in the Michigan primary, my opinion is that our delegates should not be seated, should not be counted 50-50 and should definitely not be counted as the election went. It cannot be assumed that all the uncommitted votes were for Obama because mine, for one, was for Edwards. There are too many people who DID NOT vote because the delegates weren't going to be seated. Since it's too late for another primary, they need to just drop Michigan altogether and let it go. It's impossible to "guess" what the voters who voted "uncommitted" wanted and it's impossible to "guess" how many people didn't vote because their candidate wasn't on the ballot.

Yes, it's a clusterfudge and I blame the Michigan Democratic Party officials who have had an awful lot of issues over the past few years.

What is a clusterfudge? That sounds like a word Rose Nylund would use! St. Olaf story!

Although I would love to see this drag on, I'm getting bored. I'm ready to rev up the machine against Obama.

Well, I'm almost as old as Rose :)

Last time I checked, it was "The Other Party" who caused this mess, as a few others, in FL.;)

Well-The Winners/Losers are:
Officials say Fla., Mich. delegates will get half-votes
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24281546/
Democrats seat half Florida and Michigan delegates
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNe...edName=topNews

either way...soebody should tell hillary to be careful waht she asked for....realize...she had been pushing for MONTHS to get them seated...now that they will be...and not in a fashion that she wants...o well...sometimes you should just leave some things alone.

Nobody should have been seated.

Bust a deal, face the wheel!

I was not surprised that Florida and Michigan got equal treatment, but I was surprised that the Michigan State Democratic party recommendation was undertaken which essentially took 4 delegates from Hillary and then gave Obama those 4 plus 55 delegates to represent "uncommitted" votes. That was too much a liberty I think.

But the real buzzkill here was CNN having the new projected numbers ready to go and showing the various scenarios.

Even with this latest Hillary move on Florida and Michigan- Obama is STILL going to be nominee. She would need over 70% of the super-delegates and a damn good performance in the last 3 primaries to take the win.

And I do not see that happening. If you look at the various cases presented, today was a big win for Obama. In essence- his campaign got what they wanted in terms of proposed solutions except that the split in Michigan was a bit different.

So once again, Hillary has declared a "defining moment" that could turn the tide- and it didn't happen!

At the end of the day, Obama got the 1/2 vote ruling for Florida, the 1/2 vote ruling for Michigan AND a compromised Michigan delegate count that gave him more than what he potentially could have won assuming all uncommitted were for him.

Hillary got nothing she asked for.

In the broader sense I take this to mean that DNC leaders have definitively dismissed the Clintons as the power leaders behind the party and have given that honor to Obama. That is huge. Today is the first time that power shift has been formally "ratified" if you will.

The big question remaining though is what the Hillary supporters will do in the general election.

Obama's disadvantage today was how what was best for him conflicts with the prima-facie case for how to handle Florida and Michigan.

What I mean by saying that is that to the average man in the street the votes should all count- regardless of party rules. The right for your vote to count just resonates a lot better than a lot of fancy rules and machinations that are contrary to that basic concept. This is especially important outside of Michigan or Florida where voters might not be as familiar with how things really went down in both states.

So for Hillary this was easy. The "every vote should count as cast" argument worked in her favor.

But for Obama the favorable argument was to not have Florida or Michigan seated at all. Obviously he cannot do that given the power of "every vote should count", so instead his team came up with inconsistent approaches to the states- half value in Florida and a 50-50 allocation of Michigan voters.

Granted the disparate treatment could be considered reasonable in light of how the ballot differed in both states, but the average man in the street will not care about that.

At this point it is clear to me Obama is going to be the nominee- and I expect that will be confirmed by Thursday of this coming week. Clinton may go to the Credentials Committee, and it might be a good play for her to force Obama to make her VP, but she will not be the nominee.

The outstanding question now is whether Obama can win. I thought he was unelectable before today, and with Hillary supporters angry over what they will see as a breach of the "every vote should count" concept- I expect he is in an even bigger hole than he was before this.

In other words, what a lot of Democrats have said before might be coming true. Namely, Obama will get the nomination- but Hillary did a great job of doing all she could to ensure Obama could not win the White House.

Time will tell. Lots could happen before November...

lol "clusterfudge"

IMVHO it is a polite way of posting another term;)
Should be able to locate it somewhere on one of the links here, along with
FUBAR, SNAFU, et al....:D
Military slang
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_slang

My thoughts......

1. Are they going to seat the Superdelgates from either state? IMO they should not....

2. All this bickering is just helping McCain

3. Why did they make the rules if they were going to break them?

How can anyone say that they shouldn't seat the delegates from FL?

1. A fair primary was held with everyone on the ballot, Obama didn't campaign here because he knew that he would get his butt whooped and if he pretended like he didn't try to win FL and MI then the DNC would have to do something to accomodate him.

2. Florida is a state that decided the Presidential race in 2000 and played a big role in 2004. As a state that is split about 55/45 republican it could easily go blue this year due to the unpopularity of the Bush white house.

The DNC got exactly what they wanted out of this- an insurmountable Obama lead.

I completely agree. It's also just really annoying.

OBama didn't campaign there because the DNC had told Florida their votes wouldn't count if they held their primary when it was scheduled.

Giving anyone ANY votes from Florida, after stating the votes wouldn't count, is patently unfair. Hillary basically told the world she didn't believe the Democrats would stick to their word. Oh, wait .... status quo.

Barack shouldn't have gotten any of the FL votes. He was so certain that they "should not count". The fact that we even had delegates already siding for him when they hadn't even resolved this until now grinds my gears. Why should we give anything to him when he didn't care about us? I can't stand him. I don't know what I'll do come November if he's the nominee. Actually, I do kinda have an idea of who I'll vote for.

What are you talking about?

He's doomed in FL, Michigan will be interesting. The Union workers love Hillary but I don't know if they'll side with Obama after that stuff he said in Pennsylvania.

I don't know if "doomed" is the right word.... Yes, he is going to have a hard time, but I can see it going either way. Obama is just going to have to work hard.

Major cons against him in FL: He has campaigned in the state since 2004 for various state officials including Charlie Crist and is buddies with Jeb Bush (Who will no doubt come out of the woodwork to support him).

Another con: Voter base: A large Hispanic population that tends to side with Bush, Martinez, and Crist. Also a huge retired, military population; The 2nd largest VA hospital in the country is in my backyard in Tampa Bay.

However, a pro for Obama is that the younger crowd in many of the large city areas like him over McCain. Will that win the state? We shall see...

I don't like the idea of Hillary being VP. This whole mess proves she can't fall back. Obama would always be looking over his shoulder trying to figure out what the Clintons were up to. I'd like for her to stay in the Senate. If she really cares about the party she would be more helpful there.

And I don't get Hillary supporters saying that if she wasn't the nominee that they would vote for McCain. They are nothing a like.

Honestly...I think a lot of Hillary supporters, especially women, have decided that if she isn't the nominee, they'll vote for McCain or not vote at all because they're upset that a woman isn't being nominated...which to me is stupid. If Clinton does get the nomination, I won't vote for her, even though I'm a Democrat - but that will be because the Democratic party picked the losing candidate for the nominee. If she had won fair and square, I would vote for her...but she hasn't, and won't.

I also think that Hillary will never be VP for Obama, either - not after all the bullshit she's said about him.

It has been pointed out to me that once the normal human urge of "venting" is over and done, Hillary supporters especially women voters will fully and totally support the parties nominee.

I am not sure if I am following your comment very well.
My understanding is that FL State government is is about 2-1 Republican.
And as they lead and control the legislative policy and laws of the State, they are the ones that caused any number of problems.
So I would think any anger should be directed toward that direction.
I find it rather hard to imagine that Barack does not care about the people and population of FL let alone any State.

The amount of people saying they will switch sides will steadily decline leading up to and after the conventions. That said, I think either side would lose to support McCain once this gets up and going. Hillary would be very divisive, and Barack Obama is going to scare moderates before this is over.

But yeah, I don't think the anger regarding the nomination will carry over.

I agree that the anger regarding the nomination will die down by November. The reality is, Obama and Clinton aren't very far apart on the issues. They are both miles apart from McCain though. If you vote based on issues, as an educated person should, and not on race, gender or any other superficial reason, then the other democratic candidate would be your optimal choice. You better believe the Michigan Unions would take Obama over McCain. McCain didn't win Michigan in the primaries either.

Whoever in Florida decided to switch the election date earlier should be scolded, not Barack. And I don't trust Clinton at all, she seems to switch stances a lot.

I don't know, it should be up to the state when they have their primary, that whole thing just seemed like a whine contest to me

My personal opinion is that primary in Florida was not a true representation of its Democratic vote. The reason is that Florida Democrats knew long before the election that their vote essentially would not count, so I think many did not bother to go to the polls.

Explain to me how Florida's republican government is responsible for the Florida Democratic Party's action.

Assuming you're right, a smaller sample size on a poll of this scale would mean a slightly larger margin of error but the numbers should still be accurate.

Just who proposed, voted on, and instituted the change in the FL primary date?

I can't answer that for PhiGam, but I can say that there are several states where the Democrats and Republicans hold their primaries and caucuses on different days. I live in one. However, I realize that wasn't the case in Florida, but nothing was stopping them from doing so.

As this is about FL, there are several ways to locate the information about it:
Ths following just happened to be the very first on on the search engine results.
Florida Democratic primary, 2008
In August of 2006, the Democratic National Committee adopted a proposal by its Rules and Bylaws Committee that only four states: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina would be permitted to hold primaries or caucuses before February 5, 2008.[1]. In the spring of 2007, the Florida legislature passed by overwhelming majorities House Bill 537[2] which moved the date of the state's Republican and Democratic primaries to January 29th, a week before the earliest permitted date[3] of both parties.
In response, the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee voted on August 25, 2007 that Florida was in violation of its rules, and gave the state 30 days' notice to change the date of its primary.[1] As Florida did not respond, the Committee stripped Florida of its delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention.[4] On August 31, officials from the four approved early-voting states asked all the candidates to pledge not to campaign or participate in Florida, and all the major candidates signed the pledge.[1]Despite the pledge, the major candidates remained on the ballot, as Florida rules do not allow candidates to remove their names without withdrawing completely from the general election.[5]
In October 2007, Democrats from Florida's congressional delegation filed a federal lawsuit against the DNC to force the recognition of its delegates: however the suit was unsuccessful.[4][1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida...rimary%2C_2008

They were trying to do the dems a favor by making the primary more meaningful. The DNC is STUPID for ignoring votes from battleground states.