The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

My recollection is that HRC appeared at several fundraisers in Miami prior to the date of the Fla. primary. Although they were "private" fundraisers, why do they not fall within the "events to which democratic voters are invited" element included within the definition of prohibited "campaigning" under DNC Rule 20.C(1)(b)?. If so, no delegates are permitted to be awarded to HRC under the DNC Rules. Just asking. Here is a link to an invitation from the Florida Democratic Party to an event which HRC attended immediately before the Florida Primary asking for support/contributions to her campaign: http://www.miamidadedemocrats.com/events.asp?EventId=486&nDate=1%2F27%2

Hillary's typical female supporters give women all over the world the worst name ever with their wrongly premised feminism. This is not feminism. This is self indulgence by certain women for one of them. Everyone in the world, except themselves, can see through them completely. I for one do not need this type of banding together in orde to make me feel relevant or empowered. The real power comes from within when one, whether female or male, understands oneself. Hillary is a wrong answer before she is a wrong female answer.

When Captain Kirk was a cadet, he was given a choice of alternatives, all of which led to failure. His choice: change the rules. Mr. Spock opined, "It was only logical!"

As Kirk and Spock demonstrate, changing the rules when all other alternatives lead to failure is a sign of enlighted leadership.

Trek on, Ms. Clinton! Live long and prosper. And from a different time and place, "May the force be with you!"

The folks at iNewsTube.com are pointing out that Obama may have to give up all his FL delegates because of his violation of rule Rule 20 - Section C 1. b

http://inewstube.com/politics/may_31_dnc_rules_and_bylaws_meeting_preview_obama_may_be_forced_to_for feit_fl_delegates.html

In spite of the fact that Obama supporters believe it is Hillary's job to enable their weak and inexperienced candidate, the opposite is likely to occur. Lanny Davis is a great lawyer and right-on with his proposed analogy seeking a solution for the two-state temporary disenfranchisement in contract law's ability to facilitate a cure for any breach in existence during the life of a contract. And he's also right to highlight the fact that the party standing in the way of a cure can never benefit from such impeding action.

The delegates from MI and FL were ALWAYS going to be seated in some fashion, up to and including in full. That was provided for in the rules from the inception - and it's the reason why most of the candidates left their names on the ballot in Michigan. Obama and Edwards were grandstanding when they took theirs off. (Plus Obama was about 20% down in the polls there at the time.) Furthermore, there is no reason why Obama should get more than a proportioned percentage of the uncommitted votes in Michigan since people voting for Edwards - about 14% nationally at the time - may now support Clinton over Obama as their subsequent choice.

A revote in either or both states was subsequently proposed - with funding offered - yet Obama nixed that idea, likely afraid he would lose again. Under contract law, he would never be allowed to benefit when preventing a solution to the original date breach which initiated this conundrum.

Additionally, while all the candidates agreed not to campaign in the two states - and nothing beyond that - Obama broke that agreement by running ads in Florida, thereby nullifying any delegates he would have received there, according to the rules.

The DNC should have come up with a response to states' scheduling conflicts that did not impact the election results, especially since the date changes were initiated by Republicans in Florida, and the people voting in each state had no control over any of it. Now, party "leaders" are left with the task of making amends for the chaos they've created. All delegates should be seated in both states based on the elections that took place, except for Obama's Florida delegates.

As to concerns about setting a precedent for future elections regarding date setting, that point is moot. Democratic party officials will be revamping the primary process going forward - possibly toward a more functional winner-take-all strategy, such as the GOP enjoys. Conceivably, voting would take place on a single day. Caucuses must be eliminated, as they are non-democratic and nonrepresentational. Either way, an inexperienced candidate with no record could never again come out of nowhere to take the nomination, whatever color he or she may be.

What remains to be seen is how the DNC will account to Hillary Clinton's campaign for the loss of momentum, new voters, and suppression of fundraising that is a direct result of the party leaders' blunder. All that must be quantified and compensated for the entire process not to appear to be a sham.

2.3 million people voted in the FLA and Michigan primaries. There votes counted for something. Especialy in FLA, no one campaigned, all had web sites and all had been on many TV debates, and both Obama and Clinton were very well known names.

Another point but a bit off target. Clinton won Kentucky and West Vir by large margins. Mostly because Obama did not really campaign in either state. Why? He has-had over $40 million. Spend a little and he might have done better. Hillary has campaigned in every state up or down in the polls. Which is why she leads in so many swing states and leads McCain nationally. Thanks for listening-reading

"many Michiganders could not vote for Obama and therefore either stayed home, or voted for uncommitted because they could not even write in their vote for Obama. Aren't they disenfranchised to the tune of hundreds of thousands?"

This is voter suppression and is the one thing that might hold up in court resulting in ALL of the votes being tossed out. No court would ever force the DNC to take the delegates but the entire votes in FL and MI could be thrown out. A candidate who is running but was asked by the DNC to take his name off the ballot (MI) and voters in two states who were told your vote isn't going to be counted (i.e. might as well just stay home) is voter suppression and it is against the law in the sense that the vote counts from those two states are tainted and skewed as a result.

> Sincerely
> jacksmith... Working Class :-)
> p.s. Cynthia Ruccia - I'm with ya baby. All the way. "Clinton Supporters Count Too."

Are you STILL copy-pasting the same damn post, pretending to be a Clinton supporter, when you were stumping in favor of McCain just a while back?

Lets be real here about Michigan and Florida. Everyone already knows that when the rules were set, Michigan and Florida were not supposed to count based on agreements by all candidates and the democratic party leadership. This was an agreement signed by the candidates - a contract among those that would be charged to uphold the highest contract of the land - the Constitution. If one of the candidates would so easily break the contract for their election, would they also break the contract that the country is based on?

Ok, setting that aside, the contention is that not counting the votes would disenfranchise the voters - sorry too late. When the Michigan Democrats voted to move up their primary, they knew they were potentially disenfranchising their voters. Remember, there was an uproar during the Michigan primary over that fact that many Michiganders could not vote for Obama and therefore either stayed home, or voted for uncommitted because they could not even write in their vote for Obama. Aren't they disenfranchised to the tune of hundreds of thousands?

Now as for Florida - yes the democrats in office did not have the votes to keep Florida from moving up its primary. So then, given this was the case I understand that all the party regulars informed the voters that their votes would not count. While I agree that the voters did nothing wrong and both Hillary and Barack were on the ballot, the fact that all voters were told their primary votes would not count, lets analyze who voted anyway. As I understand it, apparently there was a significant property tax issue on the ballot that drew a record numbers of voters to the polls. And because they were at the polls for the property tax, they voted in the primary. Now if the only people, or the majority of the people went to the polls for the property tax issue, who DIDN'T go to the polls? More than likely it was non-property owners. Speaking of disenfranchasement, who were these non-property tax owners and who would they have more than likely voted for if they had come to the polls. Well I would bet that they were African Americans down in Broward County, and other heavily democratic strongholds. The same voters who were disenfranchised in 2000 because their names resembled felons and other ridiculous reasons. So again, who is in the process of being disenfranchised. There is nothing fair about being disenfranchised, but given the rules, no outcome at this point would result in no disenfranchisement, so lets stop this as a one sided issue.

A split of half the votes as the penalty, with that half being split evenly between Obama and Clinton would be as fair as any other outcome.

Does anyone else see the similarity between this publicity seeking, planted protest and the self serving "protest" by the Bush administration in the infamous election SNAFU in Florida in 2000? That was a complete effort to manipulate, mislead, and stir up controversy rather than encourage the right thing. This protest? Seems like the same to me - unethical at best, completely manipulative at worst. Perhaps the only difference: we were unaware that the 2000 protest was a Bush administration plant, whereas this time we are completely aware that this is a tacitly sanctioned event.

You have the right to march and boycott, but the bottom line is Obama and his campaign has done a great job and we need to unite the party to beat John McCain. Florida and MI should be seated but you can't cheat and allow one person to get all the votes. ITS TIME FOR US ALL TO DO SOME SOUL SEARCHING. THE DEVIL IS ALIVE AND SPEAKING.

Most of these comments indicate how sexism in America is alive and well. If you think you are helping Obama by posting your sexist comments think again. You women haters are disgusting trolls.

Posted by: Elizabeth | May 29, 2008 2:32 PM

Elizabeth, get a grip, no genuine Obama supporter is sitting here posting anti-feminist remarks. The people posting these are the same people 'posing' as Hillary supporters who say Hillary or McCain but not Obama--closed minded people who can't stand racial or gender diversity but want to fan the flames of division. Rush Limbaugh ring a bell?

"You women haters are disgusting trolls."
=====================
And the Obama haters are.....?

I didn't realize there are sooooooooooooo many sore losers. Didn't your mom's teach you to be good sports?

Most of these comments indicate how sexism in America is alive and well. If you think you are helping Obama by posting your sexist comments think again. You women haters are disgusting trolls.

Wow, the more I read about this, the gladder I am that the Obama campaign is urging their supporters NOT to create some sort of counterprotest on Saturday. Nothing good can come of this Clinton-inspired street theater and certainly not party unity. (I'm guessing some Obama supporters will turn up anyway, but if you're reading this... Please don't!)

If you are an Obama supporter and you have the time, why not spend the day on something constructive like registering voters? There are Obama-organized Vote for Change drives all over the country, it's fun and rewarding to do, and November is not as far away as you may think.

"Instead of sitting on their hands and whining about unfair treatment, they need to (1) support & vote for the candidate who's always stood up for them and other so-called "underprivileged" groups"

Ummm...hate to break it to you, but Obama has a better womens' rights voting record than ANYONE in the Senate (Naral 100% rating). Just because Hillary has a vagina doesn't necessarily mean she's the best candidate for women...

"..to call attention to what they say is the exclusion of women's voices from the democratic -- and Democratic -- process and the disenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida voters."
=================
The exclusion of women's voices? Huh? How could anyone have missed the long, loud, Primal Scream of Clinton and her supporters in this election? Does it even matter that insisting that all the MI delegates be seated to Obama's exclusion is obscenely unfair? These women would also exclude the results from the caucuses, which my State participated in, because they "favor Obama," WTH?

WHAT is wrong with these women? WHY don't they understand that this year it is URGENT that we have party unity. Roe v Wade is at stake, as is Legislation that has favored women such as Title 9. I say that Hillary supporters need to pick their battles carefully, and realize that the issue is NOT whether the party is excluding "the woman candidate," but, rather it is Hillary Clinton as the Candidate that has been rejected by the majority...by a slim margin it is true, but facts are facts, and the Party needs to move on....

How can she in her right mind claim that Michigan should count in her favor, when Obama wasn't even on the ballot?!?! The women is becoming delusional.

Doesn't seem like men are welcome, somehow, at this rally for universal suffrage generally and Hillary's glorification specifically.

But I'm glad Sen. Obama is considering some leading women for his running mate.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10672.html

Someone has released a copy of Hillary Clinton's bedtime prayer. Here it is:

"Now I lay me down to sleep;
I pray the Lord my soul to keep.
Keep me safe through all the drama -
Just let someone shoot Obama."

Since I live outside the matrix of Clinton spin, I can recognize that this rally is divisive and self-serving. How does protesting before a committee of the DNC about a position that only serves one candidate help unify the party?

It doesn't. When the Democrats lose the general election, Hillary will deserve part of the blame.

IS THIS SEN CLINTON'S KRYPTONITE ?

Do the caucus states count ?

No Clinton supporter will respond. Interesting. One person responded that they didnt understand the process, but were convinced it favors Obama, yet no facts.

Can any Clinton supporter respond ?

I hope they have some hot looking girls there who will burn their bras. Worth checking out!

What a disgraceful spectacle. These women are sending a great message to the country. Despite having agreed to the rules of the primaries, voicing your support to Iowa & New Hampshire voters that Florida and Michigan should not count, it is now OK to cheat and lie. Everyone knows that the Clintons are the masters of mendacity- "I did not have sex with that woman, Bosnia sniper fire, etc...". Their behavior is completely in character. Yet for a bunch of white women, and a couple of token "Oreos," to take to the streets of behalf of this loathsome couple is a pathetic, totally hypocritical farce. Maybe you will be beaten by Poice and attacked by dogs- just like in Selma, AL. Such a noble cause...

Demonstrating because they are allowed to benefit from their wrong-doings?

Blogha

I agree with you about not voting for Clinton. However voting for McCain; the upstairs candle never was that strong but in his older years, it is barely flickering.

There is no way Clinton wins, no way. It was hers to lose and she did it. This is theater not politics.

"I don't like people who when losing will do anything even lie to get back on top."

She's even lied about her campaign fundraising. Remember right after PA she said she raised $10 million online in 24 hours. There were huge headlines about it? TOTAL LIE.

Those daily cash receipts are available to the public (after a few weeks or so delay) and she raised nothing of the kind--like $1.7 million. And the press hasn't called her on this. If you google it you can find the actual official daily cash receipts that the campaign has to file.

Shocking that someone could lie so often -- and it's even more than we realize b/c the press never called her on that so what else is out there that she wasn't called on the carpet for? And then she whines that the press is so hard on her? Not nearly hard enough, in my view.

Another example of this is how many people are unaware that she supported the sanctions of FL and MI, that her staffers far outnumbered Obama supporters on the committee that voted for them and that the Rebublicans ALSO sanctioned MI and FL for the same reason (moving up their primary).

Virtually all the press gives air/ink time to is her endless droning about 'disenfranchisement' and her battle to seat the delegations. Why not report the WHOLE story. Bizarre...

I will be contributing and supporting democrats if Obama is the nominee as he has earned it with great planning running an honest and respectful campaign in face of Clintons unspeakable dirty and negative campaign.
If some how Clinton clinches the nomination from him through her lies and dirty and shameful tactics. I will not only vote for republicans but also work tirelessly for them to make sure she does not win the white house.
If Clinton is so electable then why is she not able to win against a rocky senator with an obscure name and colored skin totally unknown to masses compared to Clinton as house hold name.
She did everything along with her husband to stop his momentum, they played the racist card the sexist card lied and even stooped so low to suggest somehow he will be assassinated.
She wrongfully argues he cannot win against McCain because the uneducated blue collar white vote will not support him, ( I truly believe once he starts campaigning against McCain in those states he will make his case) does she truly believes that if she steals the nomination from him the Afro Americans, college grads and young voters who came to Obama's camp because of the positivity of his message will vote for her? Can she win without their votes?
Some one needs to make her see how miserably she will loose come November, she is ready to sacrifice the interest of the party for her own gains will she do the same with the country? If she is going to run the country the way she has run her campaign then I feel a lot safer wit 4 more years of McCainBush presidency at least he is an honest man.
Blagha

Columbus Ohio

"But if people are offered hope of a new beginning then more of the same is unappealing."

Well said. Very eloquent. And Hope is a contagious emotion.

sad.. and silly.... why such poor losers? There was never any mandate that said just because HRC ran she would win. She was beaten and that is that. I have no objection to a woman president.. but to THAT woman.. I have some platform issues that are killers..

Sadly here we are. And it is due to words that came out of H's mouth. I remember once upon a time when she said she was not just some little old woman standing by her man. Then she stood by her man and her marriage and family -- why for political capital. The sniper fire words were far too much. The RFK words hers to own. I don't like people who when losing will do anything even lie to get back on top. What turned me against her is that for every 1 good volunteer there are at least 3 bad ones (and I live in a Hillary state). I have way too much personal experience (not by choice) all the way down to bailing them out of jail. And it seems the first reflexive response is lie.

Focusing on Clinton's ploy planned for Saturday, we lose sight of the fact that this was Hillary's nomination to lose and she lost it. Obama had to overcome numerous advantages that Hillary had at the start and he did because he offered the people what they were looking for, a very American theme, a new beginning. The people need to recreate there government after it had strayed so far from the will of its people. Those who were disenfranchised, he brought to the polls.

Hillary Clinton offered a strong candidate who had a vision of the country that was similar to George Bush's. She offered a strong personality who is not in touch with the country's angst and had to convince the country to follow her rather than their own will. You can do that with people that are afraid. But if people are offered hope of a new beginning then more of the same is unappealing.

This is why I believe that there is zero possibility of Hillary winning at this point, because after all superdelegates are still people.

As a woman, I also am embarassed by another woman who screams SEXISM at the drop of a hat but then plays coy and cutesy ('I think Rush has a crush on me') and also exhibits fake emotion (crying in NH) in order to engender sympathy.

This really has deeply offended me as a woman as well. When she is asked difficult questions she often laughs hysterically or plays that cute response like 'oww, you hurt my feelings' like when she was asked about her HIGH negative ratings. A man would NEVER, EVER get away with this. It turns my stomach.

It is so sad that Hillary Clinton had to be the first female to run for President, because judging by her behavior she has turned back the women's movement about 50 years. All she had to do to get the nomination is get the most delegates and Barack Obama would have gone away. Now she wants to change the rules..... If she doesn't get that, or her supporters are blind to that... Who do think will vote for her after all of her tricks ?

Posted by: factfinder | May 28, 2008 11:33 PM

I see NO facts in your post--just general sweeping statements that = nothing specific Hillary has ever done for women OR the American people.

As a woman, I see a selfish woman who only seeks to promote and advance herself. If not, then why did she not shriek about FL and MI's 'disenfrachisement' instead of being fully on board when she thought she would easily win the nomination.

As a woman, I also am embarassed by another woman who screams SEXISM at the drop of a hat but then plays coy and cutesy ('I think Rush has a crush on me') and also exhibits fake emotion (crying in NH) in order to engender sympathy.

I also am offended that a woman claims 35 years of experience--many of which (if not all)--are from riding on her husband's coat tails. There are women with 35 years of experience that did not get it through their husband's coat tails.

I am also disgusted by a woman who claims to be a feminist but stays with a serial cheater (could this possibly be for said political advancement?)

I could go on and on but I am not the only one (or woman) who sees through this narcicisstic, sociopathic, race baiting, assassination dreaming piece of garbage and--as a result--she soon will be gone.

It will take years to repair the damage she has done to the Democratic party, women, and racial equality but at least--at long last--this self centered shrew will be off the national stage.
THANK GOD!

"Clinton has a long history of helping to strengthen women's rights"

Really, HOW EXACTLY? ALL OF THESE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND WHAT IS IT THAT SHE'S DONE, FOR WOMEN OR ANYONE, FOR THAT MATTER?

HILLARY CLINTON: WOMAN OF THE PEOPLE?

In her first 6 years in the US Senate (her first DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED POSITION as opposed to appointment or corporate job), Sen. Clinton introduced a grand total of 20 bills. Four of those bills were for naming various buildings after dead people, two of them were directly related to the attacks of 9/11/2001 and several others were things like congradulating sports teams.

In Barack Obama's FIRST year in the US Senate, he introduced 152 bills. MORE THAN 7 TIMES AS MANY "DEEDS" IN 1/6TH THE TIME!

Add to that, if you include the time Obama spent as a DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED Illinois State Senator, he has introduced MORE bills JUST on the topic of Ethics Reform than Sen. Clinton has introduced in her first term as Senate, which represents the TOTALITY of her ELECTED and DEMOCRATICALLY ACCOUNTABLE experience, as opposed to her time on the corporate board of Wal-Mart.

If women comprise at least 51% of the country and don't have a voice, then it's up to said women to stand up for themselves and get themselves a voice. Instead of sitting on their hands and whining about unfair treatment, they need to (1) support & vote for the candidate who's always stood up for them and other so-called "underprivileged" groups; (2) organize, make themselves heard, and do every single thing they can think of to support that candidate and themselves. Women's "equal rights" have never come easily or been handed to them on a silver platter. Even the right to vote was a victory hard-fought and won against men who said women should be kept in the kitchen, pregnant and barefoot. As MSNBC "reporters" prove, many men still subscribe to that.
A vote for Obama would preserve the status-quo that too many men want to make permanent. Obama's never done a thing to help or further women's rights. Clinton has a long history of helping to strengthen women's rights and she's a strong role model for women both in the U.S. and in other nations. This is largely why so many men are adamantly against her. However, if women stand up for themselves and Clinton, they'll win--they outnumber the men who want to "keep them in their place."

Why hasn't the DNC penalized Iowa, N.H. and South Carolina for breaking the same rule for which Florida & Michigan have been disenfranchised? DNC members refuse to answer. However, common sense tells us that Obama has spent millions of dollars on the DNC and the delegates--millions that contributors like Oprah Winfrey have made possible for him to spend. If worse came to worse and Obama were nominated because of the DNC's unfair actions, he'll lose to McCain in the fall, largely because millions of outraged Democrats will then vote for McCain because we'd trust McCain more than Obama to lead America.

Posted by: Pat Knif | May 28, 2008 10:50 PM

If you vote Republican, you're voting for a party that ALSO SANCTIONED THEIR FL AND MI DELEGATIONS AND 'DISENFRANCHISED' THEM. BOTH THE RNC AND THE DNC SANCTIONED BOTH THE FL AND MI DELEGATIONS!

As to why the DNC AND RNC didn't punish NH and Iowa, they HAVE always vote early. South Carolina was given an exception to vote early to represent the south. If you are from FL and wanted FL to get that chance YOU SHOULD HAVE LOBBIED/ADVOCATED FOR THAT WITH THE DNC AND RNC.

The rest of this about Oprah, etc, is gibberish. Oprah has not donated any more than the $2,300 maximum as is limited BY LAW.

THIS IS A COUNTRY OF RULE AND LAWS. YOU CAN'T JUST BREAK THEM B/C IT SUITS YOUR INTEREST. TRY AND LEARN SOMETHING ABOUT THE RULES OF THE PROCESS...

AND AS FAR AS YOUR CONSIDERED, WORSE HAS COME TO WORSE--OBAMA HAS ALREADY WON THE NOMNATION AND ALL OF FL AND MI COULD BE SEATED FOR HILLARY--100% OF ALL OF IT FOR HER--AND IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE FACTS THAT OBAMA HAS WON THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION.

IF YOU WANT A RESULT, WORK FOR IT. DON'T COMPLAIN AFTERWARDS THAT IT WASN'T FAIR SIMPLY B/C IT WASN'T THE RESULT YOU WANTED. THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN FAIR. OBAMA HAS WON. SEATING ALL OF FL AND MI FOR HILLARY WOULDN'T CHANGE THAT BASIC FACT ALTHOUGH IT WILL NOT HAPPEN B/C IT IS FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR TO THE PROCESS AND THOSE THAT FOLLWED THE VERY CLEAR RULES. DEAL WITH IT. AND TRY TO LEARN SOMETHING WHILE YOUR AT IT.

I know several people who did not vote because they did not want to brave the cold Upper Peninsula winter day to vote in an election that would not count anyway. Any movement to seat our delegates disenfranchises these people who would have voted if they thought it would count.

Hillary is trying to steal the nomination and I will vote Republican if she is on the ballot anywhere. And by the way, I am a white 65 year old woman who is supposed to be in her corner--NOT!

For all those Hillary Clinton supporters who are protesting about the seating of the delegates from FL and MI----
below you will find a quote from the 2008 RULES that your candidate, Hillary Clinton agreed to:

" RULES for the 2008 Delegate Selection for the Democratic National Convention:

C. 1. a. Violation of timing: In the event the Delegate Selection Plan of a state party provides or permits a meeting, caucus, convention or primary which constitutes the first determining stage in the presidential nominating process to be held prior to or after the dates for the state as provided in Rule 11 of these rules, or in the event a state holds such a meeting, caucus, convention or primary prior to or after such dates, the number of pledged delegates elected in each category allocated to the state pursuant to the Call for the National Convention shall be reduced by fifty (50%) percent, and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by fifty (50%) percent.

In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state's delegation. In determining the actual number of delegates or alternates by which the state's delegation is to be reduced, any fraction below .5 shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number, and any fraction of .5 or greater shall be rounded up to the next nearest whole number. "

Your candidate, Hillary Clinton, also agreed to the harsher rules established by the DNC, which was to remove 100% of the delegates, as punishment for a violation of timing in changing the date for the primary.

The DNC and the RBC do not OWE Clinton anything. I feel bad for the states that had their primary dates changed on them, but THAT is an issue YOU NEED to take up with YOUR STATE leaders.

Obama and Clinton did not force that decision on your state. Both candidates agreed to the rules. Obama took his name off the ballot because that is what the DNC told him to do. The other candidates did also, EXCEPT Clinton, even though she said she would take her name off the ballot (did she lie?)in MI.

Clinton has lost the nomination. Barack Obama is working hard to bring the Democratic party together in order to win against McCain in November.

If we do not unite as a Party, there will be 4 or maybe even 8 more years of Republican RULE in this country - and we cannot afford that. Please, I ask you, for the sake of this country, for the good of our country, please put your differences aside and support Barack Obama so the Dems can take back the WH and we can try to rebuild our country.

Why hasn't the DNC penalized Iowa, N.H. and South Carolina for breaking the same rule for which Florida & Michigan have been disenfranchised? DNC members refuse to answer. However, common sense tells us that Obama has spent millions of dollars on the DNC and the delegates--millions that contributors like Oprah Winfrey have made possible for him to spend. If worse came to worse and Obama were nominated because of the DNC's unfair actions, he'll lose to McCain in the fall, largely because millions of outraged Democrats will then vote for McCain because we'd trust McCain more than Obama to lead America.

What a farce. What about those voters, especially MINORITY WOMEN, who did NOT vote in Florida or Michigan, because they knew that UNDER THE RULES that these states violated procedures. How are their rights being treated by Clinton here? There would be many more Obama votes and delegates in these two states if they had followed the primary schedule. To count them as fair now is absurd.

To anyone who thinks the same way this poster does:

"Hillary was forced to agree to disenfranchise Michigan and Florida, ........"

First - Hillary Clinton FORCED????? Certainly you are kidding, right? We have good evidence to prove that no one forces Hillary Clinton.

Second - Clinton absolutely was not forced. She WILLINGLY agreed to the rules and the "punishment". She signed the pledge, agreed to the rules, and said (in public, many times) that the votes would NOT COUNT.

It is only because she has lost the nomination that she now wants to go back and change the rules, just like she has done all throughout this campaign.

She knew what she was doing; no one forced her. Do your research on what happened back then. So many Clinton supporters are so easily deceived, by the masters of deception, the Clintons!

I would like to point out to the many people reading these comments that not all anti-Hillary comments are made by Obama supporters. There are many Republicans who love to stir the pot and get people all upset.

In fact, if you watch the media coverage of the RBC meeting on Saturday, do not assume that just because you see "Obama" signs in protest, or even people wearing Obama gear, that they are TRUE Obama supporters. It is well known on the internet that there are serious efforts out there to make it look like Obama supporters are there to protest against the Hillary supporters. Republicans plan to show up, trying to make it look like Obama supporters have shown up in protest.

Obama supporters are leaving all the protesting to the Clintonistas. They are, after all, the ones complaining because their candidate has lost the nomination.

A caveat to Obama supporters planning on attending the Clinton rally: DON'T DO IT! Obama detractors would like nothing more than to see angry faces on television. In fact, Clinton is banking on this. If you must show up, please be on your best behavior. Please, let's win this thing the right way. We are not Republicans!

Obama 08!

Hillary and her surrogates have thrown Dmocratic Party to the dogs! GO GO Mcain! she has cleared every obstacle on your way! today you even borrowed her lines! Probably you both consult Karl Rove! Way to go SIR MCAIN!!!

The article states:
"to call attention to what they say is the exclusion of women's voices from the democratic -- and Democratic -- process...."

I am a 53 year old woman. Should I also add that I am white and middle class? I am very proud to say that these organizations and this planned protest rally do NOT represent me.

I would like to also add that I am sick of hearing that women have been disenfranchized and that we have been excluded from the voting process. Millions of women have voted, all across the country.

I wish that these women who claim to be standing up for all other women would stop trying to lump us all together. They are so very wrong in trying to claim that they speak for all women; I speak for myself and I do not support a march on Washington DC to protest in front of the DNC and the RBC.

What a spectacle they will make of themselves.

She smart and has good judgement
She voted for the war!!
She has McCain and Rove support.

poet1b: How was Hillary "forced" when 13 of the 30 on the DNC committee who decided on this are Hillary supporters? I'm not sure I understand your reasoning here. Please, let's assign blame where it is due.

"Disenfranchisement" is a strong word to cast around on others when it is the state legislatures of MI and FL that knowingly caused this. If we are going to fairly apply the "d" word, then let's also apply it to the others, at least to some degree, who stayed home because they were told their votes would not count (even HRC said this late last year). Speaking of fair representation - what about walking into a booth and finding only one name and "other" to vote for? You should only see that when you vote for your precinct captain or Castro.

I think it's great Hillary continue to run through June 3 and I think the DNC should come up with as fair a ruling as possible that balances the rights of ALL the voters of MI and FL given the messed up voting process they encountered caused by the poor decisions of their state legislators.

"Hillary was forced to agree to disenfranchise Michigan and Florida, both big states that fit her demographic. The fix was in when Florida and Michigan were disenfranchised."

RIGHT. HERE'S HOW THE CONSPIRACY WENT DOWN:

1) 'THE CONSPIRACY' FORCED BOTH REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC STATE LEADERS IN FL AND MI TO MOVE UP THEIR PRIMARY AGAINST THE RULES OF BOTH PARTIES KNOWING THAT THESE TWO DIVERSE STATES 'FIT HILLARY'S DEMOGRAPHIC'

2) THEN, 'THE CONSPIRACY' FORCED A DNC COMMITTEE STACKED WITH HILLARY STAFFERS TO VOTE FOR SANCTIONS WITH ONLY AN OBAMA SUPPORTER VOTING AGAINST SANCTIONS. (AN OBAMA SUPPORTER NOT IN THE CONSIRACY? AND YET ALL OF THE CLINTON STAFFERS ARE? I GUESS CONSPIRACIES ARE TRICKY.)

3)THE CONSPIRACY FORCED THIS STRONG FEMINIST WOMAN--HILLARY CLINTON--TO SIGN OFF ON SANCTIONS.

4)A CONSPIRATOR JUMPED DOWN HILLARY'S THROAT AND FORCED HER TO SAY THESE WORDS "MI DOESN'T COUNT. THE VOTES THERE DON'T MATTER"

5) ALL OF THE SUDDEN WHEN HILLARY IS LOSING SHE DISCOVERS THIS HORRIBLE CONSPIRACY AND STARTS SHRIEKING ABOUT DISENFRANCHISEMENT AND BILL STARTS RED FACED CONSPIRACY RANTS. HOW CONVENIENT, THEY DISOVERED IT JUST IN TIME....TO LOSE ANYWAY.

WELL AT LEAST THE CONSPIRACY TRAIL IS SO OBVIOUS AND SO CLEAR CUT THAT NO ONE WILL MISTAKE IT FOR....A COMPLETE JOKE!

Senator Clinton has become an embarrassment to democracy.

Don't count Florida and Michigan, then get used to saying President McCain. Obama is the candidate forced upon us by the media and the DNC political machine, and the obvious one sided coverage has me to the point of turning my back on the DNC for good.
Posted by: poet1b | May 28, 2008 8:53 PM

Right you do that. Vote for the REPUBLICANS--WHO ALSO 'DISENFRANCHISED' FL AND MI.

Hillary was forced to agree to disenfranchise Michigan and Florida, both big states that fit her demographic. The fix was in when Florida and Michigan were disenfranchised.

Don't count Florida and Michigan, then get used to saying President McCain. Obama is the candidate forced upon us by the media and the DNC political machine, and the obvious one sided coverage has me to the point of turning my back on the DNC for good.

Really would your believe if I say----
"Our purpose is not to divide the party or attack the DNC or Senator Obama," said the Hillary Rapid Responders (yes ---really).
Please go out there and help the Clinton person win!!
She has McCain and Rove support.

Please, Clinton supporters, I appreciate your passion, but you are hurting the Democratic Party (and the same should be said of Democratic party supporters who are harsh Clinton critics: Hillary is a brilliant person, and would make a great President).

That being said, the only way that Clinton could possibly be considered ahead in the popular vote is if Clinton gets her MI total, and Obama's MI total is zero. For reasons unrelated to Obama's absence from the ballot, a Federal judge agreed with the ACLU that MI's primary law was unconstitutional. It seems a bit disingenuous for her to include 328K to zero in her calculation. If the shoe were on the other foot, and if Obama were touting that calculation, I could not support him, because it's patently unfair.

By all other tallys Obama is ahead in the popular vote: current total from rule-abiding states (with or without estimates from the caucus states IA, NV, ME, WA), total with FL included (with or without caucus estimates), as well as any of these totals with MI's uncommitteds going to Obama.

As Nancy Pelosi said, this is a process where delegate numbers are the deciding factor. Say that Clinton were to receive all of her FL and MI delegates and Obama got zero MI delegates, and that PR, SD and MT polls are accurate. Then, even if FL and MI delegations are seated at 100%, she can't clinch the pledged lead in the convention even if she gets 100% of MI's uncommitted delegation (she'd need part of Edward's delegation *and* 100% of MI uncommitteds).

After the primaries are over, Clinton will probably need ~200 more delegates for the nomination under current rules. This would change by only about 10% if the FL and MI delegations are seated at 100%, even with Clinton's 178 delegates from these two states.

As to Obama's electability, his polled favorable rating is consistently higher than Clinton's.

Please Please Please
Give it the little Blonde Clinton.
McCain want to run against her.
Who give a darn with the delegate count!
The Clinton person is support to win.
It's her destiny

KEEP IT UP. KEEP UP THE SHRIEKING AND THE HYSTERIA.

I LIVE IN NYC AND SHE IS GOING TO LOSE HER SENATE SEAT OVER THIS INSANE FACT TWISTING SO, PLEASE, KEEP IT UP!

I live in NYC too and everyone is talking about how she will lose her Senate seat b/c of this freakish and desperate downward spiral. We are embarassed to have a race baiting, assassination dreaming weirdo that is calling the rules that she agreed to disenfranchisement.

the FACT that 90+% of BLACKS have voted for Obama is PROVABLE of my contention that Obama interjected this issue contrary to Media reports that are supporting him..
Posted by: lylepink | May 28, 2008 8:16 PM

Lyle,

1) Please learn to speak English. "Provable of my contention" is gibberish as is the rest of this post. I actually have NO idea what you are trying to say.

2) I'm waiting for your imput on the polls from five months ago that said Hillary would win the Democratic nomination by a landslide. Since this happened--UMMM, NOT--I guess we can agree that POLLS FIVE MONTHS AWAY FROM AN ELECTION ARE MEANINGLESS.

"award her the delegates she EARNED fair and square."

What about fairness to Obama who took his name off the ballot IN MI AS WAS REQUESTED BY THE DNC?

WHERE'S YOUR OUTRAGE ABOUT THE LACK OF FAIRNESS THERE?

WHY DOES FAIRNESS ONLY EQUATE WITH WHAT BENEFITS HILLARY?

AS THE NEW GOV. OF NY--ONE OF HER SUPPORTERS SAID--"THIS IS DESPERATE AND NO FAIR MINDED PERSON WOULD AGREE WITH IT"

KEEP IT UP. KEEP UP THE SHRIEKING AND THE HYSTERIA.

I LIVE IN NYC AND SHE IS GOING TO LOSE HER SENATE SEAT OVER THIS INSANE FACT TWISTING SO, PLEASE, KEEP IT UP!

Carleton: I notice you stress that you are BLACK and the good things Bubba did for your RACE, then all of a sudden you use RACE as the major reason for supporting Obama. This goes against any reasonable argument you may have for supporting Obama, simply because he is considered BLACK. The Obama campaign has used RACE as an issue and the FACT that 90+% of BLACKS have voted for Obama is PROVABLE of my contention that Obama interjected this issue contrary to Media reports that are supporting him..

"Therefore, for the love of our Democratic Party, please cease and desist your deplorable actions against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and seat Michigan and Florida as the voices of the voters intended, and award her the delegates she EARNED fair and square."

CAN ANY CLINTON SUPPORTER EXPLAIN TO ME WHY HER STAFFERS STACKED THE COMMITTEE THAT VOTED FOR THE SANCTIONS, SHE SIGNED OFF ON THEM, SAID "MI DOESN'T COUNT" BUT NOW, IT'S DISENFRANCHISEMENT.

PLEASE, WOULD ONE CLINTON SUPPORTER EXPLAIN TO ME WHY SHE DID NOT STAND UP TO THIS SO CALLED 'DISENFRANCHISEMENT' AT THE TIME?

COULD IT BE B/C SHE WANTS TO CHANGE THE RULES SHE AGREED TO B/C SHE IS LOSING?

WHAT IS FAIR AND SQUARE ABOUT THAT?

PLEASE EXPLAIN...B/C IT SEEMS THE ONLY TREND W/REGARD TO CLINTON AND POLLS IS THAT THE MORE THE NATION SEES OF HER, THE Lower HER ACTUAL VOTE TOTAL TURNS OUT TO BE.

"The argument Hillary and her supporters [like me , [lylepink] are making is valid for the following reasons. First and foremost is the states that are vital for the Dems to win the GE. Ohio, Pa., Fla., Ky., and WV. Each of these show Hillary winning and Obama losing according to most Polling data"

AND THIS IS A VERY CONVINCING ARGUMENT B/C POLLS FIVE MONTHS OUT FROM AN ELECTION ARE ALWAYS ACCURATE, RIGHT?

LIKE POLLS FIVE MONTHS AGO THAT SAID CLINTON WOULD WIN THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION BY A LANDSLIDE?

PLEASE EXPLAIN...B/C IT SEEMS THE ONLY TREND W/REGARD TO CLINTON AND POLLS IS THAT THE MORE THE NATION SEES OF HER, THE MORE HER ACTUAL VOTE TOTAL TURNS OUT TO BE.

For unknown reasons, the reporter failed to provide the name of the actual hotel in question. For anyone planning to demonstrate for either side, here's the relevant info:

Marriott-Wardman Park Hotel, 2660 Woodley Rd, NW in Washington D.C., from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m.

Hopefully there will be more than a few Obama supporters on hand to balance out these anti-Democratic fanatics.

The argument Hillary and her supporters [like me , [lylepink] are making is valid for the following reasons. First and foremost is the states that are vital for the Dems to win the GE. Ohio, Pa., Fla., Ky., and WV. Each of these show Hillary winning and Obama losing according to most Polling data available for the last couple of months or more. WV, my state, has a strong history of voting for the winner in the GE. I think it goes back to 1916 when no Dem has won without WV voting for them in the GE. The Electoral College Map shows Hillary winning more than 300 [I have 309 without Ky. and WV for Hillary] and I cannot find where Obama can break 200. These are numbers I have found consistent/constant since June of last year. "Figures don't LIE, but LIARS Figure" Remember to "Listen for what they don't say." and I strongly think/believe Hillary can win the GE based on my research over the past 18 [eighteen months] and Obama is almost certain to lose.

This is not ac complicated as many of us would like to think. I am a 45 year-old African American who will attempt to say this from an objective position: Hillary Clinton came into this race with one of the greatest assests and thus advantages of any candidate in the history of politics - an extremely popular former president as her greatest supporter, she had nearly the entire political delegation from many of the states on her side based upon that advantage, she had the most popular name and brand on her side... she was and continues to be very popular - because she does offer something very special. I have always been a Clinton supporter. I believe that Bill clinton has done outstanding things for this country. I tell people all the time, even with the girl chasing, he has done wonderful things for theis country that can never be erased. I actually believe that Hillary Clinton is the better politician (over Obama)This is based upon my affection for her and my admiration for her. Having said that, this is simple... even with all of the advantages... the majority of people and caucus states have pick someone that represents something else. This does not mean that they are rejecting her. It just means that they looked at what Mr. Obama had to offer and picked that. Mrs. Clinton's has chosen not to accept defeat. She has instead chosen to take a large portion of the party along on a ride that will lead them to nowhere. It reminds me of a loss in the NCAA Championship game that I recall Georgetown vs Villanova. Everyone knew that Georgetown was a more talented team but Villanova's strategy was better. I was heartbroken and I had terrible thoughts about the Villanova program for at least a month. Then I realized that my feelings were based upon feeling that my team had somehow been cheated. the truth is that they just lost and it hurt, but it was not the other team's fault. I want everyone to remember that. Hillary does not HAVE to win. the truth is that this was really pretty much over months ago. I recall that even today people get angry when they hear this, but it is true. Remember that with every primary, even the primaries that she wins, there are that many fewer delegates remaining to be won. Hating the press for saying it does not change it, hating Obama supporters for feeling good about their choice's future does not change it. Losing does not make you a loser... the way you lose does. At the end of the contest you can continue to say that you are the better choice, or you can take that same energy and raise your (former) opponent's hand in victory and be a part saluting a great contest.

CALL TO DEMOCRACY IN ACTION FROM INFORMED DEMOCRATS TO DNC

To: DNC Members
From: Informed Democrats
Re: Michigan and Florida Voters Candidate Intent and Voices Counted devoid of misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavior
Date: Until Michigan and Florida are Seated

Dear Governor Dean and the Esteemed DNC Members,

As a lifelong Democrat, I continue to ask myself why you, the Democratic National Committee continue to conduct yourselves in the tradition of the Republican Party?

Throughout the history of the United States of America, we have been fortunate enough to have had many major political parties: Republican, Federalist, Democratic Republican, Whig, Free Soil Party, Know Nothings, Populist, Progressive, Bull Moose, Reform and of course, our beloved Democratic Party.

We are Americans; therefore, we are bright, intelligent, literate, passionate, honest, and hard-working and sometimes Bible thumping and Second Amendment gun-totters.

Therefore, for the love of our Democratic Party, please cease and desist your deplorable actions against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and seat Michigan and Florida as the voices of the voters intended, and award her the delegates she EARNED fair and square.

Why embarrass the Democratic Party any further by awarding the nomination to the media created Manchurian Candidate Obama and wait for the Republicans and the 529 to unload to the world Obama's unelectable dirty laundry: Antoin Rezko, William Ayers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Iraqi born Aiham Alsammarae, the former electricity minister convicted of corruption in Iraq and his deal with Obama and Rezko to build nuclear power plants in Iraq-a nation we are currently at war?

If you will not listen to reason, please accept this CALL TO DEMOCRACY IN ACTION as fair warning that the17 million plus Americans voting for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, if Michigan and Florida are not seated with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's full award allocation, will in fact:

Leave the Democratic Party en masse;

Work diligently against any Democratic candidate who willfully and purposefully bashed, maligned, or denigrated Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist purposes (don't think we can't, we are a powerful coalition, and we can give our $2,300.00 personally to any candidate we like and agree);

Vote for Senator John McCain, USMC retired in November if Senator Barack Obama is the Democratic Party's nominee (trust and believe- we will never get behind Senator Barack Obama or mindlessly fall in line with the misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavior called for to turn against our parties most electable candidate Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton; and lastly,

Watch with "I told you so" satisfaction and indignation for the next eight years as the Republicans retain the White House and the Republicans regain the House and the Senate.

We as Informed Democrats will take no more misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavior from you, Governor Dean and your Esteemed DNC Members.

Due to your misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavioral actions, we are forced to place the United States of America above the Democratic Party. Enough is enough.

Democratically Yours,

Informed Democrat

Fine, whatever, get it out of your system Hillary supporters. Have a fit, pout, cry, and then get over it.

Rather than a protest, this could be viewed as a "Celebration of A Candidacy", similar to a celebration of life, when someone passes away.

Get over it and let's move on, already.

????....CAN ANY SUPPORTER OF SEN CLINTON RESPOND?

Does Senator Clinton count the caucus states as part of the "Popular Vote" ?

I voted in a caucus state and want to make sure my vote is counted.....????????

Well Dear, the answer is: You're out of luck -because NOBODY---ACTUALLY Counts--- the VOTES in any of the Caucus States.

IN fact, the Caucus States are not even Required to REPORT the Votes, and a lot of them don't.

I know that is the case. HOW they "Count" the Caucus State Popular Vote is what I don't know. Evidently, they IMPUTE some level of VOTES per Caucus STATE to each candidate based on some FORMULA related to the # of registered Voters in the state & the # of people who (supposedly) turned up at the caucus to vote.

THAT Computation DOES "Count" the REsults of that Formula in the "POPULAR VOTE TOTALS" attributed to Obama/Reported by The MEDIA/& compared with Clinton's Popular Vote Total--- by Clinton./& Obama.

I do know that PLEDGED DELEGATES "WON" by each Candidate bear NO great Proportional Relationship to the # Of VOTES they got - Even in the Primary States --- because precincts with a long & strong VOTING History of Going Democrat ... get EXTRA Delegates AWARDED; since that is a charactristic COMMON to A Lot of African-American PRECINCTS -OBAMA got a LOT of FREE Pledged DELEGATES that DO NOT CORRESPOND to VOTES/VOTERS.

Obama Supporters --- What do you have to say about THIS REAL Newspaper NEWS the TV MEDIA has NOT told you about:

Change Nobody can believe in

Obama's whole campaign is based on
ONE BIG LIE:
***CHANGE***
He didn't make.

OBAMA = NO Experience/ NO CHANGE

Obama claims 7 years experience in the Illinois legislature - Working Across the Aisles, Bringing people together to get good CHANGES passed -as exemplified by 26 good bills with his name on them.

A Chicago reporter says all 26 bills were passed in ONE Year and they were NOT Obama's.

http://wweek.com/editorial/3418/10516/

EXCERPTS:
But what's interesting, and almost never discussed, is that he built his entire legislative record in Illinois in a single year.

Republicans controlled the Illinois General Assembly for six years of Obama's seven-year tenure.

Then Emil Jones Jr. (became the Senate Majority leader), He became Obama's kingmaker. Jones appointed Obama sponsor of virtually every high-profile piece of legislation, angering many rank-and-file state legislators who had more seniority than Obama and had spent years championing the bills.

During his seventh year in the state Senate, Obama ... sponsored a whopping 26 bills including many he now cites in his presidential campaign when attacked as inexperienced.

Working Across the Aisles/
Making CHANGES = ZILCH

Taking Credit for Other People's Work/
INTEGRITY = ZERO

(Obama's book "Audacity ..." Shows:
Democrats had Majority Control of the Illinois Senate when those bills were passed. They were passed during his last year in the state Senate.)

QUOTE:
"After two terms during which I labored in the minority, Democrats had gained control of the state senate, and I had subsequently passed a slew of bills, from reforms of the Illinois death penalty system to an expansion of the state's health program for kids. I had continued to teach at the University of Chicago Law School, a job I enjoyed, and was frequently invited to speak around town."

Please Pass the Word to anyone you can. Since the TV "news" has become nothing but Lying PROPAGANDA its up to We the People to get the Real News out to the public.

CAN ANY SUPPORTER OF SEN CLINTON RESPOND ?

Does Senator Clinton count the caucus states as part of the "Popular Vote" ?

I voted in a caucus state and want to make sure my vote is counted.

Mich and Fl--DO NOT COUNT--. These states and the candidates knew this going in. It's just like the Clintons to really believe that the rules do not apply to them. We saw this in the White House and numerous times during the campaign. To even think about changing the rules IN ANY WAY NOW, would be dishonest. That would not matter to the Clintons but it does to me. I'm getting very tired of wishy-washy politics. It may be time to get rid of the two-party system and go to popular vote and run-offs.

Ok, we need to get a hold of what are facts and what are mute points about who did what. Lets first examine the facts.

1. MI and FL moved their primary dates violating the rules and bylaws of the DNC

2. There is a penalty for this and if my sources are correct, it says that these states will only get half of their delegates seated.

3. The DNC announced that it would take away all of the delegates, which is in violation of their own rule.

State reps from MI and FL that changed the primary dates, should have stood up for their state and said that they would fight to get half of the delegates counted. Thus everone's vote counts, but the state itself does not count as much.

The solution to this mess is to indeed to seat half of the delegates from each state. I know that Obama took his name off the ballot and Clinton wants every vote to count but hey the rules are the rules. They were made to stop states from changing their primary dates that results in a perpetual game of leap frog.

Points about who campaigned where and violated whatever other rule need to be addressed on that rule. Right now we are talking about moving primary dates not penalties for campaining violations.

Hillary supporters are relying on faulty logic when they conclude that the voices of women are being ignored or marginalized. They are 51% of the country and unless all of them live in MI and FL, then I'm pretty convinced that their voices are being heard. It is absurd to say this. It is like saying that Hillary doesn't want to count caucassas and concluding it's because the voice of black people isn't being heard. (I know it doesn't make any sense...that's the point)

Everone needs to get a grip. If the DNC follows their own rules, half of the delegates from FL and MI will be seated and Hillary will not be able to take a majority of the delegates. Check mate

"The fact that Iowa and South Carolina both broke the rules having their primaries early, yet their votes count in full, but Florida and Michigan's don't, that's just plain unfair"

THE DATES IOWA AND SOUTH CAROLINA VOTED WERE APPROVED BY THE DNC. FL AND MI WERE TOLD THEY COULD NOT MOVE UP THEIR PRIMARIES OR THEY BOTH WOULD BE PENALIZED. THE RNC AND DNC BOTH PENALIZED VOTERS IN BOTH MI AND FL FOR MOVING UP BOTH PRIMARIES IN BOTH PARTIES.

THERE HAVE TO BE RULES TO THE NOMINATING PROCESS. IF YOU WANTED FL TO BE ALLOWED TO VOTE EARLIER--RATHER THAN SC, FOR EXAMPLE (ONE SOUTHERN STATE WAS ALLOWED TO MOVE UP THEIR DATE AND THE DNC DID PICK SC)-- THEN YOU SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED WITH THE DNC AND ADVOCATED FOR FL TO HAVE THAT RIGHT OVER SC.

IF YOU WANTED YOUR VOTE NOT TO BE PENALIZED IN FL (REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT) YOU SHOULD HAVE WORKED WITH YOUR STATE PARTY OFFICIALS TO HAVE A PRIMARY WITHIN THE VERY CLEAR RULES LAID FORTH BY THE DNC AND RNC.

AS A CANDIDATE, IF CLINTON FELT FL AND MI WERE BEING DISENFRANCHISED SHE SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD HER SUPPORTERS--WHO STACKED THE COMMITTEE--VOTE FOR IT. YOU CAN'T HAVE A PART IN DEVISING THE RULES, SIGN OFF ON THEM, SHOW YOU UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF THEM "MI DOESN'T COUNT" AND THEN THEN TRY TO CHANGE THEM B/C YOU LOST.

AN OPEN QUESTION TO ALL - Does Senator Clinton count the caucus states as part of the "Popular Vote" ?

I voted in a caucus state and want to make sure my vote is counted

Posted by: MJ | May 28, 2008 6:13 PM

Clinton does not count Caucus vote in her claim to be leading in the popular vote. If she did, she wouldn't be leading so she is fine with DISENFRANCHISING these voters.

ROGER - I saw you wrote

Yet Hillary supporters have logically formed arguments like adults that address the article at hand. Says something about the candidates...

Can you answer my question ? does Sen Clinton count the caucus states are part of the popular vote ? My understanding is that she does not

Josephine,

You go right ahead with that protest against those silly 'rules'--I mean after all, those are rules that the committee stacked with Clinton staffers made (an Obama supporter was the one dissenter against penalizing FL and MI), Clinton signed off on and was in complete agreement with ("MI doesn't count") until she LOST.

I could give a rat's ass who you vote for if you don't have the critical thinking skills to realize that and that the obvious CHEATER is Hillary. Changing the rules you agreed to because you lost under them is unethical and immoral. And nothing compared to national advertising that HAPPENED to run in FL.

And Obama took his name off the ballot in MI along with the rest of the Democratic candidates who were asked to do so by the DNC--all except HILLARY WHO AGAIN CONSIDERED HERSELF ABOVE THE RULES! And great critical thinking that he did this b/c he was losing--that's why he took his name off EVERY ballot WHERE HE KNEW HE WOULD LOSE--LIKE in KY where he lost by a greater margin than polls ever predicted in MI, right?

These Clinton Zombie points are just one IQ point above retarded. I'm so glad in less than a week, it will be OVER!

MJ - Answer is yes...but only if you voted for her

AN OPEN QUESTION TO ALL - Does Senator Clinton count the caucus states as part of the "Popular Vote" ?

I voted in a caucus state and want to make sure my vote is counted

"Hillary wants it all; however, the best she can legally hope for is that half of FL and MI delegates are seated or all delegates are seated with half a vote each. These numbers will be negligible in support of her continuing on. An exercise in futility!

If she gets everything she wants, that would send the signal that something is rotten in the DNC."

The thing is, FL and MI could be seated at full strength (which they won't--I agree) and Obama given no delegates for MI and he WOULD STILL TAKE AN EASY WALK THE REST OF THE WAY TO THE NOMINATION. It's all the more proof that she wants to take the Party down with her--SO SHE CAN RUN AGAIN 2012. Did anyone see that Amy Poehler skit. Dead on. Wonder if Hillary's still such an SNL fan now. The thing is, I live in NYC and she may be fighting to hold on to her Senate seat in 2012 with the tenor around here.

The DNC is going to assure that McCain wins in November - I will vote for Mccain because the DNC has pushed Hillary off the ticket. The DNC can have Obama and his separatist wife. They are more of a threat to national security than their terrorist friends, anyway.
Posted by: Frank | May 28, 2008 5:57 PM

You're not fooling anyone Frank. You're a racist, a republican or a republican racist. Whatever combo, GOOD RIDDANCE

Hillary wants it all; however, the best she can legally hope for is that half of FL and MI delegates are seated or all delegates are seated with half a vote each. These numbers will be negligible in support of her continuing on. An exercise in futility!

If she gets everything she wants, that would send the signal that something is rotten in the DNC.

Hillary, the Queen of Spin and a Legend in Her Own Mind!

http://klintons.com

Frank - Good strategy...will setup Hillary for 2012. In fact, since she's so good at making up her own rules, why not go ahead and move up the 2012 primaries to now? Then she can claim that 2012 vote is the more accurate because it's the most recent. I don't think a little thing like the space/time continuium would slow her down a bit.

The DNC is going to assure that McCain wins in November - I will vote for Mccain because the DNC has pushed Hillary off the ticket. The DNC can have Obama and his separatist wife. They are more of a threat to national security than their terrorist friends, anyway.

"Why is it that Obama supporters can only call Hillary stupid or unholy, or names like 3 year old children. Or other ones just try to change the subject saying, there are more important things to talk about. Yet Hillary supporters have logically formed arguments like adults that address the article at hand. Says something about the candidates...

Posted by: Roger | May 28, 2008 5:43 PM"

Interesting post...Roger you are, indeed, a typical Hillary supporter...and talented to boot. Not everyone has the ability to type so accurately with their head in the sand. Yet...could have been truly accurate with only changing two words - logically to illogically and adults to children.

This is deplorable on so many levels.

These are just bad people.

Why is it that Obama supporters can only call Hillary stupid or unholy, or names like 3 year old children. Or other ones just try to change the subject saying, there are more important things to talk about. Yet Hillary supporters have logically formed arguments like adults that address the article at hand. Says something about the candidates...

Obama cheats by campaigning in Florida with public television informercials after he signed a petition that he wouldn't. Obama took his name off of Michigan because he was losing there. Obama stands by while millions and millions of voters voices aren't counted. He doesn't stand up for these people and then expects them to back him in a general election. Fat chance! The people who tout upholding rules, well maybe we should still have the rules that African Americans and women should not vote! Rules that are undemocratic, unfair, promote cheating, should be thrown out, and apologized for. Iowa and South Carolina didn't follow the rules, but their votes are counted in full. Football has a fair set of rules and if someone cheats they are penalized. The DNC is just out of control. It will be their loss if they can't rectify the situation, because the Clinton voters will stage a silent protest in the General Election.

If Hillary wins, there is no God in Heaven. Under the circumstances he wouldn't be able to controll himself and he would have to intercede and turn Hillary into a mouse.

Perfectly stated SA. You are absolutly right.

@James OKelley: "If Hillary Clinton had ran under the Republican rules she would already be the nominee!"

Then maybe she should have run as a Republican. Her deplorable spin tactics would be certainly be more welcome on that side of the fence.

"Obama isn't a Muslim........ as far as I know." -HRC

"Hillary Clinton isn't an undercover Al Qaeda operative planning to overthrow the federal government......... as far as I know." -BigTuna

To me, this looks like in the fourth quarter of an American football game, with five seconds left on the game clock; one team is leading by 10 points and is five yards away from another touch-down on a second-down. The other team suddenly claims that Canadian football is a better game and insisting on moving to a 110-yard field and play with the three-down rule.

This is so unfair and so un-American. Any fair-minded person would dismiss this kind of unreasonable demand.

This is old and dirty politics; it is what the American voters despise. It is also one of the reasons why so many voters turn to Obama who looks like a shining star in comparison.

The only hope for the Democrats is for the uncommitted superdelegates to stand-up in force and put an end to this non-sense before the May 31 meeting.

If every vote must be counted..it's the American way....what is changing the rules after the game has started? Is the American way to cheat, steal, and lie? NO, it's the CLINTON way!

If every vote must be counted..it's the American way....what is changing the rules after the game has started? Is the American way to cheat, steal, and lie? NO, it's the CLINTON way!

NO....Obama DID NOT campaign in Florida. Some NATIONAL ads accidently got into Florida..blame the ad agency, not him. Where do you people come up with this false "Facts"? What a bunch of rubbish.

Shame on you susy...you choose wrong. You should have known the votes in Florida were not supposed to count. Anybody else would have taken the sure thing and voted in NC. It wsn't a secret...it's been there for the knowing!!! Typical Hillary supporter. Of course it's not your own damned fault...of course it IS!

Hillary and all her supporteers are so "girlie" in the worse sense of the word.
She's making a mockery of our country and our democratic system. Wish we had something akin to Siberia to ship her out to. Why oh why can't the superdelegates send her a message that she can understand. One that says that no matter what extremes she tries to carry this to, they will never support her, or her WAYS!

Marvel you are wrong. The only petition Obama, Hillary, and Edwards signed was not to campaign in Florida and Michigan. Obama was the only one who broke that petition by running public television ads in Florida.

I could have voted in North Carolina or Florida. I chose to vote in Florida. I am outraged that my vote wasn't counted. The fact is more people voted in our primary than any previous primary. Obama ran ads on public television here against the rules. So the press that no one campaigned here is a lie. The truth is Obama campaigned in Florida and Hillary didn't, but she still won. And the only reason Obama took his name off Michigan was when he saw he was losing. I hope that I will be counted as a full citizen like the millions who voted that day.

Every legal vote cast must be counted, anything less is un-American. If Hillary Clinton had ran under the Republican rules she would already be the nominee!
She needs to do everything she can to seat the entire delegations from Florida and Michigan at the convention. This includes taking it to the floor at the convention.

This action would not weaken the Democrats, it would stengthen their party!
And the country!

I would vote for an Obama-Clinton or a Clinton-Obama ticket in the fall!!!

I am also a registered dyed in the wool southern Republican!

I can't believe the narrow minded and the stupidity on this page. Let's think about this -- all agreed that votes wouldn't count in Florida and Michigan if the primaries went early. Edwards and Obama remove their names from the ballots -- Clinton didn't (oaky first sign of deceit). Clinton wins both primaries uncontested ( WOWWW what a feat when you are running by yourself). Now that you are losing the race, you flop and demand the votes be seated.

To all those Pro-Clinton -- HRC is acting like my 8 y/o son when he is losing against someone. What an example to show our children that even though you agreed to something, it is okay to change the rules to suit your own success. And yes people do it all the time but they are not in the race to control the destiny of billions of people.
I myself do not want a leader who is not true to their word nor do they allow the process to run its course. I want someone who is true to themself and to put our country first and themselves second ( like what you see in the movies). Call me an idealist but wouldn't it be nice .....

Clinton supporter a like sore losers on a playground crying because someone took 'their' ball.

It's becoming truly pathetic.

Jerry and other Obamaphiles, your rabid sexist spin and outright lies about Hillary Clinton and her campaign are no doubt coming from your conscious or unconscious awareness that she is far better qualified to be president than Barack Obama ever will be, and hence, you're all overwrought as she's still a threat to you - even though BO's supporters and the media have already anointed him king.

Interesting that one of the criticisms of Bush in Scott McClellan's recent book is that he doesn't know the difference between campaigning and governing. That's been apparent for weeks on end in the Obama camp, if I take any of their uninformed slimey comments seriously.

I'm amazed at how easy it is to fool the American people. Look at the shape this country is in. It's slowly going backwards into a third world status. I'm sure we have people in this country who are allot smarter than any of the 3 candidates running. Everyone seems to think that they're our saviours and they don't even talk about the real problems facing this country. I really feel sorry for our Grandchildren and their children. The infrastructure of America is going down the tubes and everyone is worrying about Iraq and Iran. Big business is profitering and in the mean time our Health, Pensions, Education, Roads, National Monuments Parks, Museums are being neglected or we're being charged to go into them and enjoy them like it was meant to be. The Military Industrial Complex and big business is ruining the USA. Wake up America.

I am a Florida voter, and a white woman over 50 to preface my statement. Many people in Florida did not vote because we
knew it would not count. If they give Hillary the delegates it will not be fair
to all the people who didn't vote or to the voters in other states who did play by the rules. I would be upset if I were all of you.
Do you know that when the rules committee meets this week, Hillary has 13 supporters
representing her and Obama only has 8? This is totally unfair. I am sick and tired
of everyone catering to her because she was
first lady. Obama has won this nomination fair and square and she just won't let it go. I don't understand why all these women
are rallying to her aid just because she
is a woman. She is not the most qualified person and this whole thing is insane. I don't see the African Americans holding rallies for Obama. Hillary is ruining the party and because of her and all these women we will have another four years of Bush.

The fact that millions of votes by US citizen's in Florida and Michigan are not counted in this primary election is anti-democratic. The fact that Iowa and South Carolina both broke the rules having their primaries early, yet their votes count in full, but Florida and Michigan's don't, that's just plain unfair. The fact that Obama broke the rules by running TV ads in Florida, and took his name off the ballot in Michigan because he saw he was losing there is cheating. The fact that the DNC lawyers are saying that the people who live in Michigan and Florida are half citizens is against the fundamental principle that we are all created equal. I guess those who live in Florida are not equal? The people on this blog who tout breaking rules, well maybe we should still have the rules that African Americans and women should not vote! Rules that are undemocratic, unfair, promote cheating, should be thrown out, and apologized for. As a Democrat who voted for Kerry and who wants to vote Democrat again, I pray that the rules committee will count these votes in full.

Thank you AD... Does anyone else find this incredibly sexist that it is suddenly about the "women's" vote rather than all voters in Florida and Michigan?

How about those of us that voted in Caucus states that Hillary has discounted in her skewed math? Every vote counts, huh???

Oh, by the way, I am a woman and dont think Hillary has been treated unfairly in any manner. Any sexism has come from her campaign!!!

Hillary always thought that she could steal the nomination! Bill said so! "What happened to the Democratic Party?" Bill said. "We are entitled to be Presidents again" "I mean Hillary, hum, I will be Hillary's co-President" "We have to twist or change the Rules or the people on the Rules Committee!"

Simplicity at its best; Florida and Michigan voters, if you are as passionate as you claim about the election system, VOTE OUT those BUM politicians Republicans and Democrats that did not represent you, did not go by the RULES set one year prior, instead they chose to Represent CHEATING and CHAOS.

It is that simple! Rules are Rules, without RULES or LAWS their is Anarchy and Chaos. OBEY THE RULES!!!!!!

@[blank]: "... the only other alternative is for her to be put into stocks in Times Square and publically whipped with a 12 foot bull whip while wearing a pants suit."

I am 100% behind that if she is also forced to chant "I will not use sleazy Republican tactics against other Democrats ever again" until she's blue in the face.

*Hillary Clinton agreed to the punishment of the FL and MI delegations.*

She agreed to it. The fact that Ms. Clinton is a hypocrite and a loser doesn't excuse her from the rules.

Feminists always claim they want "Gender equality." Alright then, it's time for Hillary Clinton to TAKE IT LIKE A MAN and concede gracefully, like Mitt Romney did for the Republicans.

P.S. Wow, commenter "elme" is beyond pathetic. Posting multiple times, nothing intelligent to add. I'm happy to vote for any candidate not supported by her.

Have you ever seen a group of like-minded democrats take so much pleasure in flogging one of their own ? That is because we find Hillary that duplicitous and reprehensible; we learned our lesson from that degenerate Bill, it is better to loose with a principled candidate that to win and allow a sexual predator and his primary enabler back into the White House. All of you advocates of womens rights, where were you when Hillary was steamrolling the very women she had sworn to protect, the women that Bill used/raped and threw away.

The only way for Hillary to redeem herself to us sane people after this venture into irrationality is to go on David Letterman's show after she concedes and read to us the Top Ten Reason's Hillary Lost the Nomination.

Is