Democrats Bickering over Florida & Michigan Primaries

Archive. Enter at your own risk. Unmoderated thread.

Moderator: Super Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Shimmering Auro
Posts: 1600
Joined: 12-25-2005 05:59 AM

Democrats Bickering over Florida & Michigan Primaries

Post by Shimmering Auro » 02-15-2008 02:38 PM

And here we go. As if no one saw THIS coming down the pike... :rolleyes:

Democrats in standoff over Florida

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama battle to be the Democratic presidential nominee, the winner could be determined by primaries held weeks ago in Florida and Michigan, even though the party decided to ignore their results.

Both contests have been ruled unofficial because the states violated Democratic Party rules by moving their elections forward in a bid to have more influence in selecting the nominee.

Now Michigan and Florida's 366 suspended delegates could prove decisive if neither candidate lands a knockout blow in the states remaining before the party's August convention.

Party officials are trying to avoid an ugly standoff that could linger through the summer and anger the 2.4 million voters who participated in the two primaries, both swing states that may be crucial in the November election.

"The party is certainly concerned that some voters feel their votes didn't count," said Florida Democratic Party spokesman Mark Bubriski.

So far neither state has agreed to stage another contest.

Florida party officials say the state's large elderly and military populations would have trouble participating in a caucus, while a mail-based election would cost up to $10 million.

Michigan Democratic Sen. Carl Levin said last week it would not be "practical or fair" to hold a caucus after 600,000 people have already voted in that state's primary. Others have said it should not decide delegates because many stayed away from the polls on the belief their vote would not count anyway. Continued... ... me=topNews

Posts: 45448
Joined: 03-06-2003 03:00 AM

Post by Shirleypal » 02-15-2008 03:57 PM

I think someone will end of getting those delegates in the end, matter of who.

User avatar
Posts: 18974
Joined: 06-28-2003 02:25 PM

Post by tiffany » 02-15-2008 04:06 PM

It is not fair. Obama was not even on the ballot and since those two states were out the campaigns did not go hard and fast in those states. A lot has happened in this race since then. Obama has been heard much more and I think the votes would have been different if done over. The problem is that it is not fair and Hillary should not get these delegates...that is robbing in my opinion. It was not a real race and she wants the delegates figures!

more of the above link posted by Shimmering:

"Clinton, a New York senator and former first lady, won both contests, though Obama's name was not on the ballot in Michigan.

The candidates did not campaign in either state, but some Obama TV ads aired in Florida as part of a national package of advertisements, and Clinton flew in to celebrate her victory. Both attended fundraisers in the state.

Both state parties have since allocated their delegates to the national convention that picks the candidate. Clinton would get 178 from the two contests, while Obama would get 67 delegates from Florida. Some 55 delegates in Michigan are "uncommitted" since Obama's name was not on the ballot.

As of Wednesday, Obama, an Illinois senator, had 1,078 delegates nationally to Clinton's 969, according to MSNBC, not counting the party insiders and elected officials who as "superdelegates" can support either candidate.

The two candidates could agree on a solution with regard to Florida and Michigan, but that has not happened yet. If no agreement is reached, the convention's credentials committee would have to decide in July who, if anyone, should be seated.

Clinton has said she will fight to seat both states' delegates at the party convention, while the Obama campaign has said it would support another round of contests in those states if given adequate time to compete.

The Michigan and Florida primaries violated Republican Party rules as well, and the Republican Party responded by cutting each state's delegate total in half -- a solution that drew relatively little protest from the states or candidates."

User avatar
Posts: 5865
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 02-15-2008 04:47 PM

Don't forget New Mexico, where they "ran out of ballots", and some of the collection boxes went to the homes of precinct chairs with connections to the Clinton campaign, instead of being delivered to secure and neutral locations. The process has become utterly absurd. Who still believes in this bullskit?

Imagine if you can... one (party) member , one vote - count 'em up. The person who gets the most votes becomes the nominee. Forget about caucus, delegates, 21 year old "super delegates", primaries, conventions, and all the theatrical merde!

This system must have been designed for use by people who were educated in America! Where the hell is the highly esteemed Carter Center during all of this? People in places such as Venezuela must be left scratching under their moriche hats as the Americans role into town to "oversee" an election, and "guarantee" the results.

Now, I've got to go string more single coil concertina around my place, and feed the electric eels in my moat...
Last edited by SquidInk on 02-15-2008 05:41 PM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

User avatar
Posts: 18974
Joined: 06-28-2003 02:25 PM

Post by tiffany » 02-15-2008 05:09 PM

So true Squid so true.

I did not know bout NM that they took the votes home the Clinton supporters...well she won by 1700 votes......hmmm another 2000 I guess the fix is in.........

User avatar
Posts: 18974
Joined: 06-28-2003 02:25 PM

Post by tiffany » 02-15-2008 05:38 PM

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Pelosi: Don't overrule the voters

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- who may be the most super delegate of all as chair of the Democratic national convention in Denver -- gave an interview with Bloomberg TV's Al Hunt in which she laid down the law for super delegates:

Don't veto the people's choice.
"I think there is a concern when the public speaks and there is a counter-decision made to that," she said, adding quickly, "I don't think that will happen."

"I do think that they have a respect -- it's not just following the returns, it's also having a respect for what has been said by the people," Pelosi said. "It would be a problem for the party if the verdict would be something different than the public has decided."

That message will be music to the ears of Barack Obama, who's building a lead in pledged delegates and is urging the super delegates to follow the voters. He now leads 1,133 to 996 in pledged delegates, while Hillary Clinton has a 242-163 edge among super delegates, according to the latest tally by RealClearPolitics. Obama holds the overall edge, 1296-1238.

Pelosi had one more stunner in the interview: She said the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if those delegates would decide the nomination.

Read more: ... n?blogi... ... 02x3184086

Cherry Kelly
Posts: 12852
Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Cherry Kelly » 02-16-2008 02:46 PM

IF the democrats -- read Clinton machine - demand that the delegates of the excluded states be counted - then those States should have the opportunity to vote again with just her name and Obama's (seeing how its DEM vote only that is under attack)

We should demand that all the super delegates account for every $$ they have received, list who it is from, then make them give it back to the States that they are from to pay down debts of their States....


User avatar
Magister Ludi
Posts: 8282
Joined: 04-25-2000 02:00 AM

Post by joequinn » 02-16-2008 05:59 PM

Tweedledum and Tweedledee squabbling over the first-class dining room silverware as the stern of the Titanic begins to rise out of the water...
"Fuggedah about it, Jake --- it's Chinatown!"

calamity jane
Posts: 282
Joined: 02-14-2003 03:00 AM

Post by calamity jane » 02-16-2008 06:21 PM

If Pelosi is supporting Barack Obama...well then.

Post Reply

Return to “Politics and Government 2004-2009”