May 16 2008
More on Michigan and Florida
On May 31st the DNC rules committee meets, and Clinton loyalists will need to present coherent, persuasive, and unimpeachable arguments to crush any attempt to further stall progress on Michigan and Florida.
I say “stall” because the Axelrod camp wins if deliberations are deadlocked because a motion is not carried by a simple majority. The Clinton negotiation strategy should be focused on increasing the costs of any such delay, to untenable levels for the Axelrod camp and the Party.
Costs should include all the technocratic threats I mentioned in the closing paragraphs of my last post dedicated to the subject. A rally, such as being proposed by Hillary Forums, is a good start for pressure group politics, but ultimately, an outright boycott of Democratic Candidates on MI and FL ballots in the General Election must be considered. Simple motto: You Don’t let us vote in the Primary, We wont Let you Vote in the General.
I’ve already debunked most arguments made by Axelrod’s camp claiming FL and MI deserve no hearing. I neglected a few more, which the likes of Donna Brazile plan on deploying on May 31st:
1) DNC rules were applied - and they will stand
2) Admitting FL and MI is unfair, and somehow “disenfranchises” other states, sets destructive precedent
3) The “Virtually disenfranchised” in FL and MI
4) Compromise
Before I get into into each argument, I’d just like to acknowledge what is already commonly known in Clinton circles.
DNC election rules apply only to delegates, not to the popular vote. When the popular vote is tallied, (RealClearPolitics measure will most likely be the benchmark), only fools will keep 2.3 - 2.5 million Florida and Michigan voters in the cupboard. I hope this descriptions applies to a limited number of Superdelegates (”independent delegates”).
- 1) DNC rules were applied.
No. They were not applied. The rules call for a 1/2 reduction of delegate totals. This option was not exercised - the rules were ignored. Nothing in the DNC rules allows for total disenfranchisement of FL and MI. Nothing. To claim that MI and FL were disenfranchised legally, is bombastic nonsense.
Neither Dean nor Pelosi, nor Clinton, ever maintained that FL and MI would not have their delegates seated in Denver. The implication all along, was that Primaries in MI and FL, would not be allowed to marginalize Primaries in four states previously scheduled ahead of MI and FL.
When Obama, Edwards, and Clinton signed a four-state pledge to honor the DNC position on Florida and Michigan, all this implied was to not allow Fl and MI to take precedence over Primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina. No candidate in any way, shape, or form, signed on to banning FL and MI delegates from the Convention in Denver.
What Obama signed, or how he interprets his signature, is an altogether different matter. Removing his name from the Michigan ballot, while relying on the neighboring media market of Illinois to advertise, and explicitly rally his supporters to vote Uncommitted in Michigan, sends a mixed signal on his intentions, and a clear signal on his incompetence.
The only binding aspect of candidates signatures in the four state pledge, came in the form of limiting their campaign activity. Candidates interpreted this to mean, a ban on physical appearances in either MI and FL. No more, and no less. Both Clinton and Obama appeared in FL, but for reasons which cannot be legally pinned down as “campaigning”, and there is no doubt on their staying true to their word.
To construe candidate signatures as binding on their policy stance on FL and MI delegates counts, is to spread disinformation. We see such disinformation every time FL and MI are mentioned in the media. It is plain wrong, and Obamacans need to get this through their heads, no matter how thick.
Continuing on the subject of DNC rules. Not only is the DNC not following the rules, in denying FL and MI the vote, they have absolutely no grounds to negotiate with FL and MI representatives, about 1/2 reductions of their delegate count.
DNC rules state that any state party which itself moves the voting date, will be penalized. As is well known in Clinton circles, neither the Florida nor Michigan Democrats chose to move their elections forward. The choosing was done by someone else! Republicans controlled both FL and MI State Legislatures, and when passing omnibus bills disbursing moneys for both Democratic and Republican Primaries, forced both of them forward.
Democrats fought against this in both states, but in both cases could not veto omnibus bills apportioning moneys for their own election! The DNC provided them with no alternative options or moneys for their elections, and carelessly left the Democratic parties of MI and FL, stranded!
Not even the finest reading of the DNC election rules, permit stripping or reducing in half state delegates, for actions committed under duress by the opposing party!
- 2) Donna Brazile recently suggested that admitting FL and MI delegations was unfair to all other states, and would be a destructive precedent for future elections. The logic here is appallingly stupid. Is Brazile suggesting that nixing the vote of 2.4 million voters, is the only way we can keep our Primaries fair for 48 other states? Or is she seriously suggesting that accepting 2.4 million voters, will somehow disenfranchise 48 states? In either case, the stupidity is ghastly.
Numerically, FL and MI do not impact the 48 other states. Numerically they neither enfranchise or disenfranchise them. To bring 48 others states into the MI and FL argument, is plain insulting.
Politically, for both the Nation and the Democratic Party, 48 states lose only, if FL and MI lose. If FL and MI win, the 48 states gain. There is no scenario, in which a loss of MI and FL, is a win for 48 other states.
In plain English, depriving 2.4 million voters of their vote, is positive sum loss for the Party. Reinstating their vote, is a positive sum gain. Brazile’s argument, is a cheap ploy, which anyone sitting across the table from her, should be at liberty to call for what it is, an unfounded “Victim” card.
The same goes for precedents. Mrs Brazile would be well advised to consider her “precedents” wisely. (Never mind that she needs to be fired off CNN), what kind of precedents does disenfranchising 2.4 million voters send for future elections, compared to the precedent of counting FL and MI send?
The precedent at disenfranchisement needs no explanation. A careless party, which carelessly abandons its state parties, and which is vulnerable to partisan infighting, will not make it into the next election cycle. The hemorrhage will be awesome. Then there is the 48 state strategy- which is an outright insult not only to FL and MI, but to every state. Ban MI and FL, and you are telling every state that its vote is never guaranteed into the future.
The precedent set by counting both FL and ML delegates, is altogether positive. It sends the message that the DNC is aware of its faults and negligence which it intends to correct, and that our party is a democratic party not just in name. That it is competent enough to apply its rules correctly, and even failing to do so in a timely manner, finds ways to compensate.
Now Brazile will say, that counting FL and MI sends the message to future DNC election rule violators, that the rules can be broken with impunity. She wont be troubled with the obverse question; whether the rules can be applied, without cause, shame, impunity, and in a haphazard - hence discriminatory - manner. No, counting FL and MI will not tell future violators, that the rules don’t matter. The opposite will be told, that no matter how biased the media, and partisan the party, the rules will be applied fairly, without discrimination, and at the appropriate time.
Donna Brazile should pause, before talking of any precedents. Her logic, is self-incriminatory.
- 3) There are people of strong prejudice and limited means but strong popularity (Brazile), and then there are the charlatans. One such charlatan is the Rev. Sharpton, whose action network is advocating the line, that counting MI and FL is direct theft of those votes, which were never cast.
Among all the arguments made in the press, this is by far the stupidest, most useless, and based on the greatest emotional appeal. I don’t expect anyone to make it at the May 31st meeting, but the media will try. My response to this inane logic, is this:
a- for every imagined Obama voter who did not vote, one can easily imagine Clinton voters who did not vote. Such imagining, when taken to its logical extreme, can be applied to every single election ever held on earth, from Roman times, to present. If you just imagine a better turn out in Florida of 2000, Gore could have won. If you just imagine a better turn out for the Communists in 1933 Germany, Hitler would never have won the Reichstag. If you just imagine… well, elections are fundamentally based on opposition to the imagination. They are metrical, tallied, and thrive on assumptions such as one man one vote at one time for one candidate. For every imagined Black who did not vote for Obama, there is an imagined Latino and Asian - you choose- who slept in on Clinton.
I realize Axelrod’s campaign thrives on the imagined. From imagined “grassroots” to imagined “victims,” but disenfranchising 2.4 million voters, requires no imagination.
b- This argument ignores, conveniently, that the Democratic Parties of both states, encouraged turn-out, and at no point did the DNC discourage it. Neither the Parties nor the DNC ever or even suggested replacement elections could possibly be held, and not a single FL and MI voter was under the impression that they had a choice in the matter. Voters’ options were simple, either vote now or you don’t vote at all. If you don’t vote, there wasn’t a single message or promise from anyone that you’d be given another chance to cast your ballot. This was 100% clear!
Obama bombarded the Florida election market, and while he didn’t show up in person, at no point whatsoever did he hold out the hope of another re-vote. In Michigan he promoted voting uncommitted. If some Blacks and college students, contrary to what was obvious, want to lie that they didn’t show up in FL and MI because of the DNC ban, then logically, they failed to heed their Leader- who was paying serious money for a messages getting them out to vote!
- 4) Compromise.
We can compromise on delegate numbers within very narrow constraints. Neither cutting the delegates by half, nor playing around with the voter turnout and numbers, is politically acceptable. Any such shenanigans amount to further dilution of the one man one vote rule. You cannot accept one person’s votes, while rejecting another’s. This is a fantasy option, which only occurs in nightmares. It spells defeat for Clinton, and democracy along with it. It is not the position Clinton takes, nor should her supporters. Votes must be recognized, exactly as they were cast.
In conclusion. There are three choices before the Rule Committee on May 31st. Stall (fail), approve, and re-vote. Here is how I speculate the outcome.
The Clinton camp, made repeated attempts to offer Florida and Michigan a re-vote. Contraty to DNC rules, and to what Dean and Pelosi maintained, Axelrod declined every single opportunity. His drive to disenfranchise both states, was determined. It was an illegal disenfranchisement, and there are no two ways about it. Still, a re-vote can be put on the table. It may be the only acceptable solution to the impasse.
Unfortunately, Axelrod knows his demographics, and strategy. He understands that a re-vote is both a political defeat of his candidate, and that the demographics will not budge. He would be taking a big risk, hoping for an outcome even marginally more favorable to Obama, than that already tallied for MI and FL in January.
Approval, will be very difficult for the Rules committee to approve MI and FL on May 31st. Approval amounts to admission of sins, and confessions will be in order. I don’t expect the political wherewithal for approval. Clinton proxies need to win the argument, without expecting a decision. Had the committee met on June 4th, this may have been different, but May 31st is too early, for a Primary hinging on the Puerto Rico popular vote.
The most likely outcome for May 31st, will be nothing politically, but by documenting a Rhetorical victory, Clinton can carry it over to the next meeting, when her popular vote will provide the wherewithal for more courageous decision making. I may be wrong, this is just guessing the future, but there is no guessing the argument, and Clinton supporters are 1000% correct, to fight on behalf of FL and MI.
Some Resources of Interest
Clinton Petition for Florida and Michigan
Count Our Votes
Seat Florida Delegations
Save The Voters
Make It Count Florida
Florida Demands Representation
35 responses so far
Looks like Steve Corbett PA Radio host at Wilk network has caught the attention of The DNC, yesterday Corbett launch Operation Turn Down campaign to let the DNC know that true Democrats where not voting for Obama. The phones lines lit up; calls came from state after state, blogger from a site called Confluence and others posted Corbett Operation Turn Down and the blog sphere was at a buzz. State after state voters calling and pledging they would under no circumstance vote for Obama this has to be the DNC nightmare. Operation Turn down continues Friday at 3 p.m. EST tune in folks this is going to be huge.
http://wilknetwork.com/pages/322229.php
PS Please Let Everyone Know to listen in, on the net or radio, call in we got the DNC ears let our voice be heard
“No. They were not applied. The rules call for a 1/2 reduction of delegate totals. This option was not exercised - the rules were ignored. Nothing in the DNC rules allows for total disenfranchisement of FL and MI. Nothing. To claim that MI and FL were disenfranchised legally, is bombastic nonsense.”
How about a little research? The DNC does have the ability to strip a state of their delegates if they violate party rules:
“The DNC’s rules and bylaws committee, which enforces party rules, voted yesterday morning to strip Florida of all its delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver — the harshest penalty at its disposal.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/25/AR2007082500275.html?hpid=topnews
In fact, they’ve done it before so it’s not like this is completely out of left field:
“The party punished Delaware in 1996 for similar rules violations.”
There are many other factual mistakes but I don’t really feel like going over this whole poorly written essay for them all. Readers beware: this is propaganda bullshit.
And one other thing:
Obama is only 17 delegates away from a pledged delegate majority!! This will be over on May 20th!1!!!
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/obama_campaign_were_only_17_pl.php
johnbckm–you beat me to it, but it’s worth a repeat….!!!!!
Check Out This Brave PA Talk Show Host, Steve Corbett…(Link to WILK-FM, Scranton, PA) posted by SunnyLC
05.16.2008 - 09:59 am
Check Out This Brave PA Talk Show Host, Steve Corbett…(Link to WILK-FM, Scranton, PA)
http://insightanalytical.wordpress.com/
Hat tip to Riverdaughter over at The Confluence for breaking this news and “Nana” who first reported it and also posted her report here a TM…
Seems there’s one very brave talk show host in Scranton, PA who is firmly in Hillary Clinton’s camp and has had it with being called a “racist.”
MORE
I agree with most conclusions EXCEPT that by not counting the votes and delegates of Florida and Michigan as is or thru fair do-overs, by disenfranchising these millions of voters/votes in these 2 states, DOES negatively impact voters of the other 48 states by WEAKENING THE STRENGTH of the Hillary voters’ votes of ALL OTHER 48 states. If Obama had won Florida and Michigan overwhelmingly, it would be unfairly and negatively impacting all Obama voters in these 2 states and the other 48 states. When I heard Donna Brazille say on CNN that by allowing the millions of votes of Florida and Michigan to count as is or thru do overs would be disrespecting the other voters of the 48 states who followed the DNC ‘rules’ , I about flew thru the roof. I’m from PA and I voted for Hillary. By not allowing Florida and Michigan voters’ votes to count, the strength of MY VOTE for Hillary has been weakened–as has all the voters’ votes for Hillary in the other 48 states. A Democratic nominee is chosen by the will of the people–the ACCUMULATION of ALL THE PEOPLE’S VOTES OF ALL 50 STATES! By not counting the millions of votes in Florida and Michigan, all the other voters in all the other 48 states have been negatively impacted. As Democrats, by disenfranchising Florida and Michigan, we have all been disrespected and violated as the strength of our votes in the other 48 states have been weakened. Reminder, the VOTERS in Florida and Michigan didn’t consent to anything, yet it is exactly the voters in these 2 states as well as the other 48 states who are being penalized for the actions of a few officials. This is not democracy. Democracy is the will of the people, of all the people, of all 50 states! I made this point when I contacted the DNC Rules & Bylaws, and I hope others will make this point how it must be the will of the people, all the people, all 50 states worth of people who choose the nominee. By disenfranchising millions of voters in 2 states, it negatively impacts and weakens the strength of the people’s votes in the other 48 states. IT NEGATIVELY AFFECTS ALL OF US VOTERS because a democratic nominee must be chosen by the people–by the accumulation of all the people’s votes of all 50 states! Rose Brannan in PA
Women have been messed over for many years by the Democrat Party and it appears that millions of “US” will be returning the favor, should this primary season continue on its current path. Hillary Clinton is clearly the best choice to be our party’s nominee for President. As a life-long Democrat, age 55, I think the way my party has hosed Hillary and their most loyal and largest voting block; women intolerable. I am confident the Democrat Party will pay a severe price for this blatant assault on women in November. Cry all you want about this being “sour grapes” but little good will result from your on-going efforts to rally Hillary’s staunch supporters around your chosen candidate instead of the people’s choice. Now, the Democrat Party leaders want women to get their pre- selected from the start, elite, wimp, Barack Obama elected in November. It will be cold day in hell before I comply and I also hope Hillary walks away from this Party. Most of the women, and many men as well, with whom I have contact are finished with the Democrat Party, now and forever. Also, many of “US” are starting a grassroots movement to insure these kind of sorry tactics employed by my now soon to be former party, never happen again. This clear favoring of Obama, making him the nominee because the party doesn’t want a woman, especially a Clinton woman, is more that I can tolerate. Of all the gall, the Democrat Party now expects “US” girls, including Hillary, to turn over our undying support to Obama. Sorry guys, this is not going to happen. Obama has no shot of winning in November without Hillary’s help and all of us, her supporters. Not on your life or in your wildest dreams is this going to happen. Democrat Party leaders take heed and you superdelegates had better wait to declare your support until the final results of all the primaries are tallied and the voices of all 50 states and territories are heard from. At that time, the real nominee of the people can be declared for the fall election. Let it be known that the damage has already been done to the largest voting block in America. However, it remains to be seen how deep these “bitterly disappointing and highly blatant attacks” are to women. In my mind, this is a travesty and affects all women of America. I for one will change my registration to Independent, and possibly Republican, on the day I vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton in the KY primary. Bye, bye and good riddance from Mary O’Bryan, Louisville, KY, to my former party, no matter what happens in the primaries left to come. I will write her in if it is counted in my state and IF, she doesn’t get the nomination.
where is obama’s dnc rules punishment for running ads in florida, hilldawg ????? he was the only one to run ads, did he not violate the rule ? so, you should do research instead of telling everybody else to do it. what’s the matter anyway ? afraid that those votes in florida and michigan will finally be counted and you know what that means…….
Florida and Michigan should have already had their votes counted. This is America and everyone has the right to be heard. If they’re not seated, I will leave the Democratic party and never look back. That’s something that will not change 6 months from now. I’m an average middle class person and in the end, all I have is whether I’m a decent and honest person. So, with that, my word is as good as gold.
**Obama is only 17 delegates away from a pledged delegate majority!! This will be over on May 20th!1!!!**
Indeed.
The 20th is victory day. Also unity day. Time for Democrats to get behind our candidate and start the push to Pennsylvania Avenue.
@maximum overdrive
I’m fine with seating the delegates in Michigan and Florida at the convention. I think their punishment was losing out on being relevant this primary season and hopefully this will serve as a deterrent for other states to follow DNC rules in the future.
As to your allegation of Obama violating DNC rules by running ads in Florida it seems you have a few of those pesky facts missing. Ok, I’ll do some more hand holding and do some research for you. Let’s break this down so it’s more digestible:
Allegation #1: “where is obama’s dnc rules punishment for running ads in florida
Fact Check #1: There were/are no DNC rules prohibiting any candidate from running in either Florida or Michigan. The six major candidates at the time all signed a pledge saying they wouldn’t campaign in either state, including Clinton and Obama.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/04/primary.calendar/
Allegation #2: “he was the only one to run ads [in Florida].”
Fact Check #2: He didn’t buy ads in Florida, he bought ads on national cable networks. In case you weren’t aware, Florida is a member of our nation. Heck, the Clinton campaign even conceded that he couldn’t have bought a national ad and have omitted Florida!
“Clinton’s campaign acknowledged that it’s not possible to buy 49-state coverage — that the only alternative would be the much more complex process of buying state by state and market by market.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/8019.html
Clinton’s campaign even found a loophole so that they could raise money there:
“Clinton will travel to raise Florida to raise money, which may be allowed due to a loophole in the agreement not to campaign there.”
And honestly I don’t care that she did, although I think actively fundraising in a state that you pledged not to campaign in is violating the pledge in a more serious manner than buying a national ad.
Obama is not 17 votes away from the pledged vote. Your numbers are wrong. The magic number is 2209, not whatever Obama makes it up. Declaring victory on May 20th is as stupid as losing Kentucky by more than 30 point margins.
The magic number is what the DNC says it is — not Obama or Clinton.
Right now the magic number is 2,025. Now that could/will change once Florida and Michigan are seated:
“Howard Dean: There’s going to be a Rules Committee Meeting on the 31st of May where we’re going to take up the issue of Florida and Michigan and how to deal with them. […]
So, there’s going to be some kind of a compromise is what I would predict. I can’t tell you what’s in it but right now the number is 2,025. On May 31st, we’ll find out what the Rules Committee does and how they plan to work out seating a delegation from Michigan and Florida.”
So, while I see your point I have to respectfully disagree. The govering authority on the matter says right now that number is 2,025.
Are these Obama supporters some of the paid ones? Are there any Obama supporters who are not paid? How much are they getting paid to sell out our country? What are they going to tell their children when history judges them? They were suduced by the one ring?
Paid Obama bloggers are from the Gaza Strip.
They are not even Americans
@Betty
What, because I cite references in my post I must be paid? I would imagine Obama’s campaign doesn’t bother with a website like this one — what would be the point?
Most commenters on here are unwilling to acknowledge that any of what the bloggers here churn out may be factually inaccurate. This is a democracy so I figure why not give the dissenting opinion? Most people, like you and Lou, are all too willing to assume if someone offers a dissenting view that even slightly appears to be pro-Obama that they’re a paid operative/drinking the kool aid/insane/etc.
All I’m saying is — we can’t endure another 8 years of this bullshit. If you’re a Clinton supporter then you have more in common with Obama than McCain. It’d be foolish to throw away your vote in spite. Make the choice that’s be for America — whether it be Obama or Clinton.
So this site is connected with the great radio show I just found?
Maybe it’s not but i just heard someone on the radio show mention this site. Funny thing is I have a link to this site on my blog. Yes i’m one of those liberal independents who supports Hillary 100% and just will never vote for Obama after all the investigating and reading I’ve done on just what’s really in his closet.
If you are affiliated with the radio show, good job, love love love hearing someone speak out for what so many of us feel!
good job
If Florida and Michigan have not yet been resolved and the Rules Committee does not meet until May 31st then why has the media already chosen Obama as the nominee. Do citizens not comprehend the undemocratic and biased nature of the coverage? This is so blatant that it can only lead to disaster for the process as well as the Democratic party. It does no good for Donna B to act as if there will be riots if MI and Fl are seated. Even Mayor Wilder, ex-governor of Virginia, implied on Face the Nation that if the superdelegates choose the nominee or if it goes to the convention there will be major problems in the African American community. It’s outrageous to play the race card like this and then blame Hillary for race baiting. There are more and more people fed up with how the media has negated Hillary’s candidacy and Obama’s reactions to every slight with long speeches has already become overkill and tiresome.
@CATHNEALON
Essentially by moving their primaries ahead of schedule the DNC has forced their relevance to become last. By the time they are seated most likely the nominee will have won by such a margin they won’t change the outcome of the race.
May I ask, how is this different from any other primary season? All the states vote but normally a winner is selected by fat Tuesday. Did this disenfranchise voters in 2000? 2004? Where was your outrage then?
@HillDawgon
The party has never stripped anyone of their delegates at a Convention. Get your history straight. “Disenfranchisement” is not the same thing as stripping during Primaries. I am sure you can mention more than Cleveland being “stripped”, if you really try hard, but you’ll not find a single convention where less than 50 states delegations were counted! Not a single convention where a state’s vote did not count. Not a single one!
There is nothing in DNC rules which allows to disenfranchise states. DNC can exercise its “stripping” during the Primaries muscles, but stealing at Conventions , never goes down. That’s why it has never been done. DNC can try playing games, but all delegates always show up, because games and rules are separate things. Threats and outcomes, are separate things. Get your facts straight.
2209 is the number with which we started this primary, and the number with which we will end it. No DNC rules can change that. The DNC has never suggested “2025″ would be a “magic” number. Since you seem to like facts, you are no doubt aware of this. Find me a single DNC quote to the contrary. Your Dean quote, was irrelevant, or did you miss that?
Try to tame your raging enthusiasm, and knock off the patronizing tone. We have no problems admitting to error, but you have to find at least one, for us to do so - in the meantime, try not to get carried away with a snippet of truth, which you can’t place into perspective.
Thanks for the info, Greg!
It just all seems so bizarre to me— another example of the kinds of unprincipled positions the DNC has exposed itself to making this campaign season. Had they simply wanted to punish states, why didn’t they just tell us voters ‘not’ to vote? Of course not! Yet, what they have done is tantamount to that if not worse! They’ve asked us to vote, counted, recorded and tallied our vote, but said that our votes don’t count in choosing a candidate! That’s the clearest example of disenfranchisement that I’ve ever seen! Amazing!
AA Michigani………
The official delegate count on the DNC website explicity says, “Number of delegate votes needed for nomination(rounded) 2026.”
http://www.democrats.org/a/convention_2008/delegate/
It even gives you a handy number to call if you have any questions.
Hamas campaigns for barrack Obama by using his official campaign webiste phone banking tools and making computer generated phone calls to the American voters in Gaza!
The refuge camp is under Hamas control so the internet is monitored and moderated by Hamas too!
tell me what kind of a presidential candidate to be would accept campaign volunteer help from Hamas?
I think Obama should have called himself dishonest not Moccain!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21YF7ggCG...
Barrack Obama’s call center in Gaza monitored by Hamas!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21YF7ggCG6g
Hamas campaigns for barrack Obama by using his official campaign webiste phone banking tools and making computer generated phone calls to the American voters in Gaza!
The refuge camp is under Hamas control so the internet is monitored and moderated by Hamas too!
tell me what kind of a presidential candidate to be would accept campaign volunteer help from Hamas?
I think Obama should have called himself dishonest not Moccain!
He should be disqualified from running for president!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21YF7ggCG6g
Israeli news are in shock!
Barrack Obama has a call center in Gaza , monitored by Hamas!
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/03/pali-gazans-cam.html
Barrack Obama is a liar and dishonest about meeting with the terrorists!
If he ‘d be honest he would not accept campaign help from Hamas in Gaza!
Those terrorists have been making computer generated phone banking to the US and ask the vote out for Barrack Obama! he needs to show his donors one by one! Where his donations are comming from?
If you get a phone call from the Obama camp. you may be speaking with a suicide bomber from Gaza!
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/03/pali-gazans-cam.html
I’m just curious, since a lot of people think about fairness: assuming that you are right about what the candidates signed, wasn’t it INCREDIBLY stupid for Obama to sign such an agreement not to campaign? While it sounds like you’re taking away the same privileges from all the candidates, it’s remarkably unfair. It is essentially taking away Barack’s ability to speak, and Obama’s biggest weapon is his speeches. There are probably a large amount of people in Florida and Michigan who barely even knew who Obama was before they voted. I think it’s somewhat clear that Clinton has a big advantage when no campaigning at all gets to take place. And don’t tell me about a radio commerical or one TV ad: that’s one ad that very few people hear. Sad as it is, most voters just aren’t well informed. Hillary Clinton in January had name recognition: Barack Obama: much less so.
Basically, what is happening right now is Hillary is getting screwed. While I don’t think Hillary in a fair election (where Barack and Hillary both GET TO CAMPAIGN) would have won by the same margins (certainly not 16 percent in Michigan), she would have probably won Florida by 10 or 12 and would have won Michigan by 4 or 5. Obama has consistently shown the ability to close margins in states with low familiarity, and these states wouldn’t be exceptions. It’s impossible to know because the DNC doesn’t want a revote, and because the Obama campaign isn’t going to act out of their disinterest and is perfectly willing to let the DNC take the fall. Nevertheless, some compromise should have been reached at some point. It’s too late for a revote.
Obama’s camp kind of took a sleazy way out, but giving all the delegates to Clinton, or the delegates based on the old votes… the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. There’s really just no good solution: we can’t just arbitrarily give Clinton a 5% win in Michigan and 11% win in Florida based on what would have probably happened post-campaigning. It’s not fair to give Clinton a 20+ point margin in Florida and a 15+ point margin in Michigan, but it’s not fair not to give these states to Clinton either.
If you want to be a technical stickler, you can argue that Obama got no votes, or got a fraction of Uncommitted, since some voted for other candidates too. But really, that’s not fair to Obama either. The question is “How many people would have voted for Obama if both Clinton and Obama got to campaign there and both names were on the ballot?” THAT’S the amount that we should give both Clinton and Obama: not the amount based on some “rules”
FWIW, I’m not affiliated with any candidate or party, so I’m sorry if this site is only for people who are pro-Clinton.
John
@”Juanita Gonzales”
Heh…nice.
“Try to tame your raging enthusiasm, and knock off the patronizing tone.”
Are you trying to call me an elitist? Hah, that’s too funny. You must be reading McCain’s talking points. Tell you what, you stop spewing hate speech and fear mongering, and I’ll stop acting ‘patronizing.’ It’s difficult for me to hold my tongue when I hear such utter bullshit. I bet you swallow everything the right wing spoon feeds you, eh?
Now on to your talking points.
“I am sure you can mention more than Cleveland being “stripped”, if you really try hard, but you’ll not find a single convention where less than 50 states delegations were counted!”
If you read what I wrote, I said that I expected both FL and MI to be seated at the convention. It seems very unlikely at this point that they would go unseated.
My point was that the party established rules long in advance of this primary on what would happen if a state violated the rules and set its primary early. Both states did so in order to gain special significance in the primary, since most primaries conclude with a victor in February. My guess is that the DNC will seat the delegates, but not until either Obama or Clinton have an overwhelming majority, hence taking away the special significance both states sought. To me it is a fitting punishment.
In my earlier post I cited a reference I suppose you were too heated to read in anticipation of striking me down. The DNC in 1996 gave the same sanction to Delaware for moving its primary, but that didn’t get much press because 1)Delaware doesn’t have nearly the delegates that either FL or MI have, and 2) Bill Clinton won that primary with a landslide, getting 89% of the popular vote. So, in the end, Delaware didn’t make any difference and their delegates ultimately seated.
Can’t you see why the DNC needs to enforce its rules? What if they let it slide this year, and in 2012 more of the large states move forward? I grew up in rural America where we didn’t get much attention from Washington. But guess what — thanks to Howard Dean’s 50 state strategy now every state has their moment, given they follow the rules. Can’t you see the value in that?
So, delegates have been stripped before. I didn’t know that.
I wonder if that’s why the Green Party was able to deny the democrats the White House in 2000.
John, sorry but you’re off on a lot of points in your post. Michigan, along with the rest of the country, had at least 11 months of pro-obama media prior to our primary. By the time of the MI primary, there had already been more then a dozen debates. Obama supporters campaigned for him in MI…We knew him as much as we knew Hillary. If you think Hillary had an advantage over Obama because we had the benefit of knowing her as First Lady, TOUGH! Obama made the decision to run for President as an inexperienced nobody. Only 17%ish of the citizens of Illinois had ever heard of him before he made the announcement to run. This doesn’t nor shouldn’t qualify him for any special considerations or treatment.
Obama wasn’t cheated. Where obama is concerned, everything related to MI has been HIS CHOICE. It was Obama’s strategic campaign tactic to take his name off the MI ballot. It was Obama’s strategic campaign tactic to fight against a MI re-vote. He fought against a re-vote that would have taken place in early June giving him enough time to shake hands in MI. Don’t you think he and his campaign advisers would have allowed a re-vote if they thought he had a chance to close the gap or win in MI?? He has NO right to anything more then the outcome of the votes from January.
David and Aviva, 95% of our media won’t air or print anything that reflects poorly on Obama. We can only hope that the fact that so much of the Middle East supports obama is a major red flag to the American people.
**Can’t you see why the DNC needs to enforce its rules? What if they let it slide this year, and in 2012 more of the large states move forward? I grew up in rural America where we didn’t get much attention from Washington. But guess what — thanks to Howard Dean’s 50 state strategy now every state has their moment, given they follow the rules. Can’t you see the value in that?**
Absolutely.
It’s crucial for the Democrats to follow the rules they set up and agreed to. Any other course of action runs the risk of creating chaos at the very time they need unity most.
The magic number is 2209; and the DNC should have come up with a response to states’ scheduling conflicts that did not impact the election results. Now, party “leaders” must make amends for the chaos they’ve created. All delegates will likely be seated based on the elections that took place. As to setting a precedent for future elections, that point is moot. 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 will be eliminated. Any way you look at it, a flashy no-name candidate without a record will never again stay in the race this long without getting bumped.
What remains to be seen is how Hillary Clinton’s campaign will account for the loss of momentum, new voters, and suppression of fundraising that is a direct result of the DNC’s blunder. All that will have to be quantified and compensated for by the party.
Meanwhile, Barack Obama took his name off the ballot because he thought he might lose Michigan; and this provided a handy excuse for doing so. That backfired, as will his having run ads in Florida, where he actually may see his delegates reduced to none for doing so. All candidates agreed not to campaign in either state, and none of them did - except for Obama in Florida.
As to Obama’s other ally in all of this, a corrupt media, there will certainly be renewed arguments on all sides to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine.
Let’s say that of those who voted uncommitted, 3/4 of them were Obama supporters. That would mean Clinton beat Obama in Michigan by 25 points. The polls have them very close now. I know polls aren’t perfectly accurate, but they are not 25 (!) points off. Are you meaning to tell me that if both campaigns ran an actual campaign that Obama would have lost by 25 points? Seriously? Isn’t a vote supposed to reflect the will of the people?
Just because Obama doesn’t care about an accurate vote of the people doesn’t mean that he forfeits his right to fair representation. Just because you don’t like or believe in someone does not mean that you an be unfair to them. Giving Clinton a 25 point win in Michigan is unfair to Obama. Just because other people might be being unfair to Hillary does not give anyone the right to be unfair to Obama. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
[…] many times do we need to repeat this!? How many God damn times, before the Lame and Stupid, Lepers, Tuskagee […]