FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN FACE THE "FOUR CORNERS" OFFENSE
Spend the next few days listening to Obama spokesfolks discussing the possibility of a re-vote in Fla. and Michigan. First, they do a history lesson about "the rules." Then they talk about how the two States chose to violate "the rules." Next, they talk about how there were no true elections in those states and the Clinton campaign is trying to seat those delegates and that is generally evil.
Then you would think they would propose a solution to the Michigan/Florida disenfranchisement. But pay close attention. They never quite get around to taking a position.
Interesting that they seem more interested in denying Senator Clinton those votes, even if that means dems lose the states in the fall.
posted by UMRBlog @ 05:56
18 comments
18 Comments:
What an ungodly tangle. The National Committee won't seat any delegates chosen during the January 29 primary. Florida Democrats are insisting that those delegates be allowed a seat at the convention.
And Hillary, who desperately needs either the delegates already chosen or those that she would win in a revote primary, will almost certainly challenge the national party at the convention itself in the rules Committee. Failing that, she will take it to the floor of convention where we can expect the most entertaining political theater in many years.
Howard Dean better do something quickly. Unless Florida acts before June 6 - the cutoff date for party nominatint contests - the convention will be a bloodbath.
It is now the Kendrick Meeks show and he is gonna let the air out of the ball.
Be careful K.M. what you ask for. You just might get it!
TYFCB
If the shoe were on the other foot Hillary and Co. would be far more vociferous than the Obama camp about rules being rules. It wasn't the DNC's fault Michigan and Florida broke the rules. That lies squarely on those two states. No matter what bullsh%t Governor Crisp and Hillary try to sell. If rules were made to be broken why have them? If this affected the Republican primary would Crisp be crying foul? Only if his candidate would benefit. 3 weeks ago, I would have glady supported Clinton if she won the nomination. The way her campaign is going now, I don't know now.
So, O.
You're for the 2.5 Million dems in Florida not having any voice in selecting their presidential nominee?
The issue of rules being broken is like the issue of whether we should have gone to war in Iraq. Interesting history but not very instructive about what we should do next.
TYFCB
And if Obama's name was on the ballot and not Hilaary's in Michigan, thus guarenteeing his victory, you would want Michigan's delegates eated Umr? The voters of these states have their legislatures to blame. Not the DNC or any candidate. If the DNC wants to step back in and do some kind of revote, by all means. This time Obama gets his name on the ballot in Mi. and gets to campaign in Florida. But we both know Hillary's strategy and message will be that she cared that their votes count the first time. Which of course is BS. She only cared because she thought she would get the delegates.
Here's what you wrote before
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.
O,
I'll answer your question after you answer the one that's on the table.
TYFCB
Umr: I wrote "If the DNC wants to step back in and do some kind of revote, by all means." I thought that answered your question. Of course nobody wants 2.5 million voters punished for the bad judgement of state legislatures. But this has been twisted by Hillary and the media that it is somehow the DNC's fault. It is not. Obama should not be penalized because his campaign followed the rules. Hillary will try to shape her whole Florida and Michigan campaigns around the myth that Obama didn't want their votes to count.
Sooooooo,
What made you change your mind?
1536,
My position hasn't changed. The offending election results shouldn't be reflected at the convention. Fortunately, there's still time to have a compliant vote.
I don't have anything to add about the superdelegates. My belief is that I was right the first time.
TYFCB
Not sure what you mean there. What is your position now? How do you undisenfranchise them without letting their delegates get seated?
They are only excluded if they fail to have a compliant election by June 10. If they have one, there is no rules breach and no rule change.
Can't believe you can write that with a straight face. A real "is" is moment. Gotta love the Clintonites.
Gee, I'm sorry you have trouble digesting tough words like "compliant".
I'm still not saying the outcome from January 29 should be seated.
TYFCB
Maybe you can provide the big steaming cup of intellectual dishonesty required to to digest that
load of crap.
Perhaps you will come to a time in your development when you can tell the difference between your disagreeing with a proposition and it being intellectually dishonest.
One's an opinion thing. The other's a logic thing.
Looks to me like Obama is a loser in this situation either way. If his people refuse to go along with any do-over proposal, he gets the "Obama is a chicken" treatment. If he agrees to a do-over, he stands to lose the elections in those states, in part because Clinton can make a claim of "I stood with you when no one else would" to those voters. Given those two unpleasant choices, it seems to me that he might as well tell Clinton to bring it on and run the best race he can in them, despite the likely losses. Incredibly shrewd maneuvering on the part of the Clinton campaign.
I don't know how brilliant it's been--More like necessity being the mother of invention--but you're right.
At the end of the day Obama cannot talk the Clinton campaign to death. He must beat it. He either beats it under the rules as they were originally created (which permit the "do-over") or he just complains and stalls. He's going to have to beat her in Penn, Indy, Oregon and N.C. anyhow. He might as well strap it on for Michigan and Fla. If we can think long term for a minute, it is his only chance to become president. He cannot be elected without support in Michigan and the scenarios under which he can become president without winning Fla. (or at least making McCain spend piles there) are few.
TYFCB
Post a Comment
<< Home