The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Seat the delegates while relieving them of their pledge to vote for a particular candidate. Let them vote at the convention for whomever they think will win the Presidential election in November. Let them act as Democratic Party DELEGATES not as gagged and blindfolded mouth-pieces for Florida Republicans and independents. Nothing could be simpler or fairer. Real super-delegates voting with their brains.

oh boy,,,,,,Hillary is behind in all catagories, and she is wanting all the rules to be changed in her favor so she can steal the nomination......She agreed to the rules before this all began, now we must all let the DNC know that those rules must be followed to the letter....that is the only way this election can be fair to all......the Dems have spoken and she is not the one we want to be our nominee.....Sorry Clintons......Obama is the one this country needs now......

Clinton supporters would like to have the rules changed because it is to their advantage. Hillary agrees with this.

A big part of choosing a President is the issue of character. Bush is one to change the rules when it suits him. If you like that trait, Hillary is your "man" (sorry Geraldine).

re : Florida and Michigan

Where can Seniors GET THEIR VOICE HEARD, that they don't feel represented, and to demand their rights to vote in a setting that doesn't require them to caucus!

Caucuses require standing in lines, typically have large boisterous crowds. Seniors may feel insecure, off balance,or confused. They may have difficulty hearing and seeing, and with transportation in the evening, etc. Caucuses are limited in the number of people that can even vote and are allowed in the chosen building. All of these conditions come together to deny seniors and the disabled their right to vote in an accessible way. Caucuses favor the young and fanatic.

To all the posters here who suggest that the vote should be split 50-50. No way. Obama did not earn 50% of those votes! The demographics in Florida favor Clinton so I don't know what Obama thinks he can accomplish by having a revote. I'm sure he'd be OK with seating the delegates if he'd won Florida. The only fair answer is to have new primaries in both states.

Can't Florida Dems do anything right?

Uhhhh, Maybe,

Just off the top of my Head,

Guessing here,

But,

It could possibly be,

That,

MAYBE,

THEY, want their VOTES to COUNT! ;~)

Look... nothing fair could be come of adding them in now. Not for Obama, not for Clinton, not for voters. We'll be plagued with an unended list of "what ifs"... We are to some extent anyway, but at least the "what ifs" we have now are within predetermined rules. To change everything mid-game opens up a can of worms I don't think the dems can handle at this point.

Republicans already have a headstart. We can't keep beating our heads over the same issues and make ourselves look ever more foolish.

Apparently they have dismantled the election machinery with the intent of replacing it. Therefore, it was either divide up the existing vote or a mail-in ballot. Obviously dividing up the vote would favor Obama and sending it as is would favor Clinton...so nobody is truly going to be pleased with the outcome.

The Florida legislature is at fault for this problem. The fact that they moved up the election for both the republican and the democratic party caused both of the parties to strip the votes of the delegates, in the case of the republican party, they penalized them by saying they can only seat 50 % of the delegates. I do not see anyone, republican or democrat decrying the republican party's action, perhaps because it is a non-issue because the republican nominee will win without the Florida delegation. Nevertheless, the disenfranchisement of Florida voters, if it is a valid argument, goes both ways and you should be hearing an outcry with regards to the republican sanctions as well, yet there is none.
Yet even in an attempt to correct this problem, the Florida legislation is yet again saying no way. Therefore, this issue is dead and everybody should move on. The only possible solution at this time is an agreement to split the popular vote and the pledge delegates 50-50 in both states. However, you want see the Clinton campaign agreeing to this because it would defeat their argument for getting the super delegates to go with her since she could not go before the convention and say that she leads in any of the categories, pledge delegates, states won or popular votes.
Finally, if the delegates are seated based upon the January 29, 2008 vote, Clinton stands to loose all of her delegates (both pledge and super delegates) in Florida because she would be considered as campaigning in a state that violated Rule 11 cited in a previous post, pursuant to Rule 20 of the DNC Delegate Rules.

1. Either way the DNC must break the rule to seat delegates from Mihigan and Florida.

2. Some agreed some disagreed about RE-DO

3.IF RE-DO. They dont know who and how to pay the cost.

3. IF RE-DO, they dont know which one is better, mail-in. caucuses, or primary.

4. SINCE the DNC will break the rule anyway, here is my opinion:
In Florida: Hilalry and Obama were on the ballot, why not count those delegates based on percentage winning.
In Michigan: Hillary won 53% and Uncommitted 40%, why not give Obama the uncommitted voters.

SAVE MONEY and SAVE TIME

There is clear blame.
1.the Democrates should have read section 11 of the DNC manual and not even propose the change of date.
2. The rebluican official who attached the change should have not (as he may have done it having been told by reb/Hillary/.who knows that it was illegal)
here is the ruling
DELEGATE SELECTION RULES
THE 2008 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION
Issued by the Democratic Party of the United States
Governor Howard Dean, Chairman
As adopted by the Democratic National Committee, August 19, 2006.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/de68e7b6dfa0743217_hwm6bhyc4.pdf

11. TIMING OF THE DELEGATE SELECTION PROCESS
A. No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the
second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention. Provided, however, that
the Iowa precinct caucuses may be held no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the Nevada first-tier caucuses may be held no earlier than 17 days before the
first Tuesday in February; that the New Hampshire primary may be held no earlier than 14
days before the first Tuesday in February; and that the South Carolina primary may be held
no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February. In no instance may a state which
scheduled delegate selection procedures on or between the first Tuesday in February and the
second Tuesday in June 1984 move out of compliance with the provisions of this rule.
B. All steps in the delegate selection process, including the filing of presidential candidates, must take place within the calendar year of the Democratic National Convention (except as otherwiseprovided in these rules or specifically allowed by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee

Here is a solution that I have not seen discussed anywhere:

seat 1/2 of the delegates in the same proportion as the primary outcome.

This solution
a) gives Florida a 'voice' (albeit a smaller one)

b) satisfies the Clinton claim that they won

c) helps Obama move on to the nomination without any complaints.

d) allows the DNC to claim a penalty was exacted.

And the best part of it... it costs nothing!

The choice is this: Either honor the results or hold new primary elections.

Since the existing results won't be honored, a revote it is. The Florida Dems have no veto power over this proposal. I have no idea how they got that idea.

Surely the most sensible thing to do would be to split the Florida and Michigan delegates equally between the two candidates. It avoids the cost of another primary and treats both candidates fairly. But then, sensible and politics don't go together, do they?

Let's revote and split the Florida and Michigan delegation in half like the republican did. Let's also fire all officials (democrats and republicans) responsible for this mess.

I don't know how the Democrats think that can solve the 8 year old woes bestowed by the Bush/Cheney era on the most powerful nation in the world if they can't simply agree on one of that nations most cherished principal - the simple right to vote.

In Florida, the Republican governor and legislature were responsible for the primary being moved forward. The names of all nominees stayed on the ballot and no candidate officially campaigned in the state. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post had articles prior to the election stating that the Obama campaign was in Florida placing mannequin-like posters of Senator Obama near polling places. However, no candidate officially campaigned in the state. Given that it was not the Florida Democratic Party that moved the election forward but the Republican legislature, the Florida vote should be counted "as is". It is unfair to penalize Florida Democrats for the political maneuvers of the governor and legislature.

I understand that the Obama camp is asking that the Florida delegates not be seated and that this be resolved with a caucus. I urge the party to forego this idea since it is grossly undemocratic. My husband is one of many older, intensely patriotic citizens who does not have the stamina to attend a caucus. The caucus leaves many senior citizens and working class voters out of the process. If the Obama camp will not accept the results as they are, I would ask the party to consider the most democratic process--a redo of the primary with both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama on the ballot. This would allow all committed voters to be heard and it would strengthen the party's claim to these votes in the general election in November.

In Florida, the Republican governor and legislature were responsible for the primary being moved forward. The names of all nominees stayed on the ballot and no candidate officially campaigned in the state. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post had articles prior to the election stating that the Obama campaign was in Florida placing mannequin-like posters of Senator Obama near polling places. However, no candidate officially campaigned in the state. Given that it was not the Florida Democratic Party that moved the election forward but the Republican legislature, the Florida vote should be counted "as is". It is unfair to penalize Florida Democrats for the political maneuvers of the governor and legislature.

I understand that the Obama camp is asking that the Florida delegates not be seated and that this be resolved with a caucus. I urge the party to forego this idea since it is grossly undemocratic. My husband is one of many older, intensely patriotic citizens who does not have the stamina to attend a caucus. The caucus leaves many senior citizens and working class voters out of the process. If the Obama camp will not accept the results as they are, I would ask the party to consider the most democratic process--a redo of the primary with both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama on the ballot. This would allow all committed voters to be heard and it would strengthen the party's claim to these votes in the general election in November.

"If it weren't for the manipulative Clinton's, the delegates from both states could just be divided 50-50. "

Obama PLEDGED to seat michigan and florida BEFORE the vote,
then he lost.
OBAMA THE LIAR!

You've got to be kidding? A 50-50 split would be the same as discounting the votes entirely. Do you want to lose Florida to the Republicans in November? The party must find a way to count the delegates that reflects the will of the voters - not the media or the party insiders. Florida is too important as a swing state to take the easy (yet unfair) way out.

I don't think it is possible to put the blame squarely at anyone's doorstep. It's really one of the nuances of representative politics. You can't blame the DNC for setting rules a year prior in an effort to prevent a big state from having an early impact on the nomination process. You can't blame the Florida Democrats for being outgunned by the Florida Republicans. You can't blame Hillary's campaign for wanting Florida seated, you can't blame Obama's for crying foul, you can't blame some Floridians for staying home thinking that their vote won't count.

What seems clear to me though is that the only solution is to redo the state as a Primary election. I hope the stake-holders realize this before it is too late because apparently the time may have run out on that as well. Seating the delegates based on the early primary would invite accusations from Obama and the DNC that the rules are being changed midstream. A mail-in, which Florida has never done before, invites too many accusations of fraud and impropriety. A caucus would invite accusations by Hillary that she looses caucuses, so even if Obama wins she will continue painting perception to try to woo superdelegates and Florida wouldn't have helped anything. At least with a Primary, Obama doesn't stand to loose as much as Hillary would in a caucus. He'll probably loose by about 9 delegates or so and still end up with the delegate lead.

The projected cost of the primary -- 15 million or so? -- could be raised by some sort of special fundraising committee set up by the two candidates. They both have something to gain by doing this. The DNC shouldn't be forced to pay for it nor should Florida tax payers be forced to foot the bill. It's only 15 million guys. Bloomberg probably looses more money in small change he leaves in his laundry every week. There's an idea, Bloomberg could offer to pay. He says he's for bi-partisanship and solving problems, what could be more problem solving than this? Florida is just too important in the general election to risk anything with this electorate.

Churchill paraphrased that, "democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." So folks shouldn't feel too bad about the mess in Florida. It happens. It's still comical that Florida always seems to be in the middle of it. I hope the good folks down there are preparing for the General election to make sure things run smoothly this time.

It seems clear that there are no options left apart from a 50-50 split. How can the Democratic party (both Florida and national) have created such a mess?

I really don't get it. They surely must understand that the delegates won't be seated in proportion to the uncontested vote from January. Dean has already nixed that idea, and even Hillary shills like Ed Rendell and John Corzine have recently said that such an action would constitute an unfair changing of the rules mid-game. I don't know what "compromise" they think they're going to get, but it's not going to be one that "enfranchises voters." They've just rejected the only one of those options that was left on the table.

is anyone else having problems with their post times?

I believe a re-vote would be unfair too.

...And McCain is laughing with joy. Then again, John has a lot of challenges to over-come, especially with analysis' like this abound;

Obama vs. McCain- The Internet Indicators:

http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=48

I agree with earlier comment that Bill Nelson should take responsibilty for this whole fiasco. He chose to move the primary up despite warning and if he wants a redo to support Hillary (who also said it should count until she started loosing), then he must pay the bill.

Bill is an idiot and should step down. I cannot imagine anyone as incompetent as he is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Democratic_primary%2C_2008

In the spring of 2007, the Florida legislature passed House Bill 537, in response to public support for Florida to return to a "paper trail" for elections, however, during the legislative process, a number of amendments were added, one of which moved the date of their state's primary to January 29th.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1016/p01s01-uspo.html

By Ariel Sabar | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the October 16, 2007 edition

The legislature, with the governor's support, did vote this spring to move the primaries - Democratic and Republican - to Jan. 29. But after Democratic amendments to set a Feb. 5 primary failed, nearly every Democratic lawmaker joined the Republican majority in favor of the Jan. 29 date.

Airborne...it may have been put up first by a democrat...but Charlie Crist our governor told the democratic party if that issue came up on the bill he would veto it..and he could have. I too am against mail in votes. I mean anyone can tamper with the mail..steal ballots and send them in..we have no way of knowing if its the right person who did it. We dont have what Oregon has to scan the ballots and make sure the handwriting matches the persons name on the ballot.

Can we ever have a presidential election without Florida screwing it up?

Funny thing is, the bill to move the primary date forward is proposed by a FL democrat, and majority of the democrats voted yes for it.

Now they tried to blame it on the majority republican state legislator.

If it weren't for the manipulative Clinton's, the delegates from both states could just be divided 50-50. But, NOOOOO....the old school shysters want to hijack the process! Can we please move into the 21st century and send the Clintons home? Eight years is enough! Jesus, I am already sick of them again! Obnoxious drama queens.