REAL SIMPLE: THE BASIN'S POSITION
The rules as they were laid out in '06 and promulgated in '07 should be followed.
The sanctions against Fla. and Mich. should hold. No votes to select the prez. cand.
The SuperD's have been designated and part of the process for many long months. They vote however they want. It's not like somebody cooked up a way to beat anybody out of anything.
Real Simple. Real Consistent.
posted by UMRBlog @ 20:23
4 comments
4 Comments:
How do you square being at odds with the Clinton campaign? It's a pretty fundamental disagreement.
Hillary herself was couldn't be more dishonest:
"The rules provide for a vote at the convention to seat contested delegations,'' she said. "This goes back to the 1940s in my memory. There is nothing unusual about this. My husband didn't wrap up the nomination until June. Usually it takes awhile to sort all this out. That's why there are rules. If there are contested delegations, the convention votes on it.''
But the Michigan and Florida delegations aren't "contested." There is no question that under the DNC rules, which Obama relied upon, they are not to be seated. The Clinton camp now wants to change the rules after the game has been played. For Hillary to say, "[t]hat's why there are rules," is a mind-bending Clintonism of which even her husband would be proud.
All of this is music to the ears of us Republicans. It's hard to imagine a worse train wreck for the Democrats than a convention at which Hillary snookers Obama out of the nomination by changing the rules to seat delegates from states where Obama didn't campaign out of respect for the DNC's sanctions. But I'm pretty sure it won't happen. The Democrats put up with the Clintons' strong-arm tactics when they didn't think they had a choice. Now that they do have a choice, they aren't likely to let shady dealings by the Clintons destroy their chances for victory in November.
Despite the press' trying to create a monster, when it's all said and done, we will support our nominee.
O,
I hope you're right. We could still screw it up, though. All I know is the hard feelings won't come from you or me.
TYFCB
0546,
I'm not sure you really want an answer to your question. It was just a predicate to your pronouncement. I'll give you one anyhow.
First, I'm not troubled at all by taking a position contrary to the HRC campaign. I think what I think and don't work off of anybody's talking points.
I absolutely disagree with Hillary's conclusion but her reasoning has support in parliamentary law. The Committee of the Whole always has the right to override any sitting committee. So her lawyering is not bad. The outocme is just a bad idea.
BTW, HRC is not the only one making foolish pronouncements. It is BO who has formulated the newest of "Rules", to the effect that SuperD's should be prohibited from voting independently as they choose and, rather, should be required to vote for those who have a)won the most states b) the most committed delegates or c)The Most African Parents.
Campaigns get long. Fatigue sets in. People say stupid, desperate sounding stuff.
The Basin's position is the grown up position. Whoever wins under that formulation, wins. So be it.
TYFCB
Post a Comment
<< Home