Howard Dean to the rescue?

February 7, 2008

Following up on yesterday’s reports hinting at the likelihood of a brokered Democratic convention in August, it’s worth keeping in mind that DNC Chairman Howard Dean apparently has some kind of plan to intervene.

The narrow margin in delegates, and the growing likelihood that it will remain close, prompted concern on Wednesday from the chairman of the Democratic Party, Howard Dean, who said Tuesday night that Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton should avoid taking the nominating fight all the way to the party convention in August.

“I think we will have a nominee sometime in the middle of March or April,” Mr. Dean said Wednesday on the NY1 cable news channel, “but if we don’t, then we’re going to have to get the candidates together and make some kind of an arrangement. Because I don’t think we can afford to have a brokered convention; that would not be good news for either party.”

An adviser to Mr. Dean said Wednesday that he had not discussed the idea with either candidate.

“He was essentially laying down a marker that if need be, he is prepared to step in and try to help resolve the situation,” the adviser said.

Dean added, “The idea that we can afford to have a big fight at the convention and then win the race in the next eight weeks, I think, is not a good scenario.”

That certainly sounds right to me, but I haven’t the foggiest idea what Dean could do.

This is not to say the DNC chair is some kind of figurehead; he’s not. In fact, I think Howard Dean has done a great job implementing an important 50-state strategy, raising lots of money for the party, helping recruit some great candidates, etc.

But, as a practical matter, Dean can sit down with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, aiming for “some kind of arrangement,” but what kind of deal could he offer? Obviously, both candidates want the Democratic nomination, and there aren’t any substitutes. The next best thing, of course, is being the vice presidential nominee, but I’m still skeptical this could happen, especially in “the middle of March or April.”

Even if we put aside the fact that the two candidates don’t appear to like one another, and have little incentive to pick the other as a running mate, I think there’s a more practical problem. By April, Obama and Clinton will probably still be about tied. Given this, I suspect both would tell Dean, “Why should I give up and accept the #2 slot when I’m this close to winning the nomination?”

In short, they shouldn’t. If one candidate seems to be dominating by mid-March or April, Dean may find it easier to push one way or another. But if the landscape looks like it does now, I don’t see a lot of room for making an “arrangement.”

Am I missing something? What could Dean and the DNC actually tell these two that would compel one of them to give up and take the VP slot?

Rock paper scissors.

Loser gets to be Supreme Court Justice.

  • I don’t know. Does the Chairman of the DNC (Dean) have the ability to say, “Okay, as DLC Chair, I am hereby awarding 50% of the SuperDelegates to each of you. This ensures that our nominee is the one who is chosen by the people, and not the one chosen by SuperDelegates.”

    If he could do that, it would mitigate a world of hurt. We, as voters, are tired of our votes not counting. But, I’m pretty sure he can’t do that. And the establishment wins. As always.

  • That’s exactly what I thought in reading this. Conventions have become highly planned shows centered around the known winner, and Dean would rather have this than a major and potentially divisive fight. I don’t know what he can do other than let them fight it out for uncommitted delegates, even if this is at the convention.

    One thing he might be able to do is reach an agreement between Clinton and Obama regarding how the convention is structured. If we don’t have a presumptive nominee who calls all the shots as to who speaks and about what, they will have to work this out. Both Obama and Clinton would benefit if the convention were structured so as to present a positive view of both of them for the TV cameras, while the real fighting is more behind the scenes, so that who ever wins has the best shot of still getting a positive bump out of the convention going into the general election campaign.

  • “Howard Dean has done a great job implementing an important 50-state strategy”

    Actually a 48 state strategy. If Dean hadn’t told Florida to go F itself and another Republican president such a disaster, I would have voted Republican this fall.

  • I’m all for stretching the final outcome as long as possible. My reasoning for this is to keep a defensive posture, with the slime-masters of the other side having to split their aim.
    As soon as the candidate is known, there’s going to be a feces-storm by the Republicans, the VRWMedia (same-same), and (as we all know) the mainstrem media aimed at the Democrat. As long as there is a competition, this storm can’t start.

  • Weren’t presidents selected in back room deals in the past? Is this the direction we want encouraged?

  • First, the Michigan and Florida delegates should not be seated until after a nominee is selected. If one candidate was to be rewarded for her dishonest behavior while another is punished for playing by the rules, then that would be disgraceful.

    Second, Howard Dean needs to convene the super delegates, not the candidates. Again, if after millions of dollars spent, thousands of man-hours worked, dozens of primaries and caucuses and millions of eligible votes, the nod is given to someone other than the candidate who played by the rules and won the most delegates pledged by the voters, then the party would split in two and millions would stay home in November.

    Third, before the next election, the DNC needs to drop the super-delegate concept altogether and explore ways to assign pledged delegates to more closely reflect the popular vote. The voice of the voters should not be undermined under any circumstances.

  • I haven’t the foggiest idea what Dean could do.

    Dean could adapt the national popular vote idea.

    He could ask superdelegates to sign a pledge saying they will vote according to some criterion (say, how non-superdelegates vote or how the popular vote in the primaries goes). You don’t need to get all superdelegates to sign, just a significant chunk and the primary will be decided according to that criterion. The pledge could be such that it has no effect until it has at least, say, 100 signatories. For this approach, it’s best to move earlier rather than later when it’s still unclear who people are promising to vote for when they sign. If you do it too late, picking the criterion becomes a real problem because it will be clear who the choice favors.

  • Again, if after millions of dollars spent, thousands of man-hours worked, dozens of primaries and caucuses and millions of eligible votes, the nod is given to someone other than the candidate who played by the rules

    Others have said similar things in the past two days of threads. Fron your tone, I assume the “candidate who played by the rules” is Obama. But there seems to be an assumption that “the people have spoken” and Obama is the winner, absent superdelegates.

    Clinton took more actual popular vote on Super Duper Tuesday, and while I’m actually not sure which is ahead in total popular vote to date, I would bet it is within a single percentage point either way.

    So where, exactly, is the clear popular mandate for Obama that seems to be the premise of your post?

  • I bet we see Lieberman at the Greedy Oily Party convention in MN this year. Where his heart really lies.

  • A quick addendum to my previous post —

    Florida and Michigan voters are suffering, not because of Howard Dean, but because of their respective state Democratic party’s leadership. Dean did what he had to do to maintain the integrity of the process (remember that IA and NH were prepared to move their elections into December) and give more diverse states (i.e. NV and SC) influence in the final outcome.

    I feel awful for the Democratic voters from these two states, but they should direct their anger where it belongs.

  • LOL @ doubtful

    But seriously, what’s the difference between “brokered” and “make some kind of arrangement”?

  • How I would solve the Michigan/Florida problem: split the delegates 50/50

    How I would solve the brokered convention problem: make the super delegates follow the popular vote.

    That should produce a nominee.

  • Back to Lieberman, why was he a superdelegate to start with? He left the Democratic Party when he ran for the Senate. Is Bernie Sanders a superdelegate? Sheesh, what is wrong with this party?

  • I just did the non elected super delegates that are not already commited by state. If you take all of the states Obama won and awarded all super delegates from that state he would pick up 39. If you take all the states Hillary won and award all super delegates from that state she would pick up 51. Then all other super delegates are elected officials.

    Lets look at some of the logic running through the threads here if we went by popular vote only thus far Hillary would be ahead. If we went by super delegates only Hillary would still be ahead. So if anyone has another solution that is fair then what is it. Super delegates are apportioned by state ID has 2, AK has 2, CO 6, KS 3 lets see that covers a maybe AR &TN so someone please show me a better way.

  • Nice try, Jimmy Brown, but what you see there is Obama saying something before it was clear whether or not it would benefit him. Clinton’s push was opportunism after it was clear that she had “won” FL and MI.

  • chris @15

    “I feel awful for the Democratic voters from these two states,”

    Thank you very much.

    “Florida and Michigan voters are suffering, not because of Howard Dean, but because of their respective state Democratic party’s leadership.”

    Then you are happy with having democrats suffer from the doings of the Republican legislature in FL. Because the Dem party in FL asked the legislature to reschedule, but the GOP legislature refused.

    “but they should direct their anger where it belongs.”

    I am angry at a lot of people. If Obama gets the nomination only because FL and MI aren’t seated, count on me being “Republican for a day” in November.

  • Right, to elaborate on what Crust said, Howard Dean doesn’t necessarily need to get one of them to cave, but he can and should broker an agreement on the deciding criterion.

  • If it’s true that most Democrats like both candidates (and I suspect it is, experience on The Tubes notwithstanding), this shouldn’t be so difficult and divisive.

    And if it really is 50/50 at that point, my preferred solution would be to give it to Gore. But I don’t know how you concoct a process that makes such an outcome look legit 😉

    Maybe a stage-managed draw on the first ballot, then a stampede to Gore after both Clinton and Obama are persuaded to “release” their delegates? (I’ve been reading about old elections recently; that seems to be how it went down.)

  • One of the items on the convention agenda should be to only allow the superdelegates to kick in if one candidate fails to win a majority of the pledged delegates.

  • If Obama gets the nomination only because FL and MI aren’t seated, count on me being “Republican for a day” in November. -Horselover Fat

    I’d love how you’d make the determination that, should Obama be the nominee, that he only won because FL and MI delegates were revoked. You cannot possibly know what the outcome of those states would’ve been.

    Sounds to me like you’re just making an excuse to spout unhinged lunacy. See, zeitgeist, it isn’t all from one side.

  • It is sort of interesting the way there are cries of “You must play by the rules and not seat the delegates from FL and MI” (because that would favor Clinton), but it seems like many of the same voices then want to change the rules on super delegates. Super delegates have been around for decades (while the FL, MI mess is unique to this year).

    Personally, I am in favor of playing by the rules. That means the FL and MI delegates do not get seated until a candidate is decided on. Also super delegates are free to vote as they choose, just as the system has worked for decades. If the party wants to change that in future election cycles, there are certainly arguments to be made for such a change.

    One final question. The number of delegates needed to win the nomination is I presume 50% + 1 of the delegates to the convention; does that magic number account for the FL and MI delegates not being seated? If the 50% figure is based on a total that includes FL and MI it may make it just about mathematically impossible for anyone to reach the magic number in a close race.

  • doubtful
    “I’d love how you’d make the determination that, should Obama be the nominee, that he only won because FL and MI delegates were revoked. You cannot possibly know what the outcome of those states would’ve been.

    Going by recollection, HRC margin in FL + MI is at least 111 without any undecided or Edwards pickups. If BO margin in pledged delegates is under 100, then he couldn’t win if FL and MI seated.

    I am also bothered by the big margins BO is running up in caucus states, considering how many voters can’t participate in caucuses because of logistical issues, making them less democratic.

  • Shaz said: “Right, to elaborate on what Crust said, Howard Dean doesn’t necessarily need to get one of them to cave, but he can and should broker an agreement on the deciding criterion.”

    There already is one. 2025 Delegates.

    I too wonder how exactly Dean imagines he’s going to achieve anything. The only solution is a Clinton/Obama ticket, which depends on them actually liking each other more than they seem to, and a radical pruning of both their campaigns of the grossly extremist staffers. Unfortunately we can’t get rid of Michelle and Bill. So for now I say give Michelle Barak’s Senate seat and give Bill Hillary’s Senate seat.

    Look, either Obama is going to pull ahead by next Wednesday, and then withstand the (long over due) media scrutiny to maintain his lead, or Hillary will stay even with him and then go on to win some critical later primaries.

    Frankly, I figure Obama is going to do well on the 12th. I keep hearing his commercials and there is nothing to make him lose votes. Not much substantive, but nothing to make him lose votes (unless voters hadn’t realized yet that he’s African-American).

  • Hopefully, this will be definitively settled before the convention. If not, it’s comforting to know that the DNC is working on a plan to keep democracy from breaking out at the convention.

  • Pick a date in June; let MI and FL hold an open Democratic primary; each candidated gets to keep their superdelegate endorsements up to this point, the rest have to be alloted based on their states primary results. John Edwards has to either endorse and deliver his delegates or release them. I don’t think the outcome will be tied by the time we get to the Convention. They really haven’t done very much yet to break the tie.

  • Question: When Florida and Michigan held their nominating contests in violation of the rules and their delegates were stripped, did that change the numbers that are always quoted of the number of total delegates to the convention (and thus how many are needed to win)? I haven’t seen anything like that, and it appears that those numbers were not changed.

    I would think that seems like a no-brainer. It will certainly be true that a vote to seat those delegates would only require 50%+1 of the remaining delegates. And if they are not seated, the nomination would also then only require that same number.

  • “Right, to elaborate on what Crust said, Howard Dean doesn’t necessarily need to get one of them to cave, but he can and should broker an agreement on the deciding criterion.”

    He might have to talk one of them into not caving. They are democrats!

  • it’s comforting to know that the DNC is working on a plan to keep democracy from breaking out at the convention

    A show of “true” democracy on the convention floor would be great for news ratings and would impress the purists, but the low-information, apathetic-until-late-in-the-cycle majority would see disorder and would not get a clear and coherent message – which the other side’s convention will provide. one can have a little democracy at the Convention and a Republican in the White House, or one can sacrifice a little democracy to make the convention smooth and have a Democrat where it counts.

    doubtful @ 26, believe me, when “english teacher” started popping in recently, i became well aware that it goes both ways.

  • Horselover Fat: “…you are happy with having democrats suffer from the doings of the Republican legislature in FL. Because the Dem party in FL asked the legislature to reschedule, but the GOP legislature refused.”

    Mr. Fat is seriously misinformed. Not only did the Florida Dem party support the January 29th date, nearly all FL Democratic legislators voted for it (House: 118-0, Senate 37-2). In addition, after the primary date was set, the Florida Democratic Committee had the option to hold an election on another date on or after February 5th to avoid the sanctions. They chose not to.

    Karen L. Thurman, Florida’s party chairwoman, defiantly said, “There will be no other primary. Florida Democrats absolutely must vote on January 29th. We make this election matter. Not the D.N.C., not the delegates, not the candidates,…”

    http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2008/states/fl.htm

    http://www.sptimes.com/2007/06/13/State/Florida_primary_will_.shtml

    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/2008-florida-democrats-stick-to-primary-date/

  • I think we could survive a brokered convention, and if the superdelegates threw the race one way when the voters said something else I woul be very surprised.

    I also agree that if the Republicans are forced to split their poo-flinging it would be to our advantage. The sheer volume of poo they would need to fling and the incoherent crossfire they would have to lay down would end up covering them more than either of their targets, so by the time they got a single target the poo-flingers could be totally discredited.

    We don’t need Howard Dean to “fix things”, this is Democracy and sometimes it gets a bit messy.

  • Um, it’s pretty simple isn’t it. Dean can say “I’ll seat Michigan and Florida”.
    or “I won’t seat Michigan and Florida”
    He has the power to give delegates back to these states.

    Now a lot of Obama supporters would say “How unfair!”, but you know what, these delegates represent actual voters. It may be an inconvenient truth that Hilalry won these states, but given Florida’s history, the Democrats NOT giving them a voice in this election is akin to political suicide for the party (especially if a centrist like McCain gets the Republican nomination). So unless Obama does pull well ahead of Hillary in the next month or two, we will see severe DNC pressure for him to take the #2 spot, and I think (given Florida and Michigan’s votes), rightly so.

  • doubtful wrote, “You cannot possibly know what the outcome of those states would’ve been.”

    Horselover Fat responded, “Going by recollection, HRC margin in FL + MI is at least 111…”

    In addition to being misinformed, Mr. Fat is also not very detail-oriented. Of course, ‘doubtful’ was referring to what the outcome of the primaries might have been had all the candidates actually campaigned these two states.

  • “We don’t need Howard Dean to “fix things”, this is Democracy and sometimes it gets a bit messy.”

    RacerX sets the bar low.

  • “It may be an inconvenient truth that Hilalry won these states…”

    More like an inconvenient scam.

  • HRC margin in FL + MI is at least 111 without any undecided or Edwards pickups. -Horselover Fat

    Her ‘margin’ in FL and MI is completely irrelevant due to the fact that the delegates were revoked. Because of that, no accurate reading of the peoples’ will was taken and to assume that one was ignores everything progressives are supposed to stand for concerning fairness.

    Additionally, there is no cost effective or reasonable way to hold a new primary.

    I hate that the primary voters of those states will not be heard, but at this point, it is simply a fact that there is no fair and reasonable way to include them.

  • Fargus, pardon my cynicism, but I would interpret Saint Obama’s comment as an attempt to sway voters in Florida, otherwise known as campaigning. But, hey, I am a cynic. The voters in Florida could have voted for Obama and didn’t. You do not believe that Obama’s comments were meant to make him more attractive to Florida voters? At least Hillary had the grace to wait until after the voting and did not violate any rules.

  • @39
    “in addition to being misinformed, Mr. Fat is also not very detail-oriented. Of course, ‘doubtful’ was referring to what the outcome of the primaries might have been had all the candidates actually campaigned these two states.”

    The only candidate who ran ads in FL was Obama, as part of a national ad buy. Given the demographics of FL, there is not much reason to think campaigning would have changed much as to outcome.

    Obama got the benefit of pandering to IA and NH by taking himself off the MI ballot. If he has no MI delegates or votes, that is attributable to Obama’s own behavior, which did get him some momentum out of IA. Benefits come with costs.

  • If they are not included in FL we will just have to sit this election out. I cannot and will not support a party that will not allow my vote to count. It happened in 2000 and it won’t happen to me again.

  • @38
    “Um, it’s pretty simple isn’t it. Dean can say “I’ll seat Michigan and Florida”.
    or “I won’t seat Michigan and Florida”
    He has the power to give delegates back to these states.”

    It is now up to the Credentials Committee to decide, according to Howard Dean, not him.

    The members of this committee haven’t been selected yet.

  • Honestly, I can’t believe all this talk of the Michigan and Florida delegates being counted. The party unanimously decided that they wouldn’t count long before the elections there ever took place. How can you consider changing that decision after the fact?!?

    It sucks for Michigan and Florida democrats, no doubt! But the elections held in those states simply weren’t the same as the elections held everywhere else in the nation. You might as well count some random poll that was taken in 2006 — it would be just as valid. What people do when told their vote doesn’t count vs. what they do when they know their vote WILL count are very different things. The “results” from those states are (sadly) irrelevant.

    I’ll admit that I’m and Obama supporter…but I’ll also say that I think the ideal solution would be to re-run the elections in those states, giving both candidates the opportunity to set up offices there and do their thing. Yeah, Hillary would probably still win Florida, but it would be a fair vote. (Yes, I realize this may not be practical…I don’t personally claim to know the cost or other logistical implications of trying to do something like this.)

  • Given the demographics of FL, there is not much reason to think campaigning would have changed much as to outcome.

    Are you paying any attention at all? Everywhere Obama goes, he improves his numbers dramatically!

  • Dear strangley named Horselover Fat:

    I think the point is that “Dean said”, meaning that he has control over the situation. He could staff that committee with anyone he likes. Meaning he could influence the decision they come to.

    I think it’s important to point out, that if the republicans wrap up their nominee before the Dems (and that appears likely) that they will have a major springboard to the General Election where they have months to beat-up on both Barak and Hillary. Thus again, I think that the DNC will lean hard on both Hillary and Barak to come to an “agreement”.

    Anyway, it will be interesting to see which person the Republicans choose to target because you’ll get a sense of who they feel the real threat is. Despite recent spin, I feel that Hillary is the strongest candidate, mainly because she’s had 8 years to plan to fight the republican war machine; she just wasn’t ready to fight another democrat. Shame to, because this infighting is only giving the repubs ammo.

  • He could staff that committee with anyone he likes.

    Not really. Party rules require the Credentials Committee composition to reflect the pledged delegate ratios.

  • “Obama got the benefit of pandering to IA and NH by taking himself off the MI ballot…”

    I call b.s. on this one. Hillary made the same pledge and promise to the voters of IA and NH as Obama and Edwards did. In light of that, leaving her name on the ballot was considered a non-issue at the time since we didn’t know then what we know now–Hillary Clinton is an opportunist and a liar.

  • Dave, come on do you REALLY think that the DNC would be able to stand by that decision? Also you really are discounting the human element when you say that people vote differently when their vote counts vs. doesn’t count. I don’t think that the people would march to the voting booths any differently, except some might not march at all. Interstingly though both Michigan and Florida had excellent turnout. Their votes will be counted, though we don’t know how many delegates will be assigned. I’d imagine less than 100%.

    It’s important that you understand that McCain can sell this on the campaign trail. There are enough independents and centrist leaning democrasts to buy in to the “my vote didn’t count” sentiment enough to sprun the Democrats on principle alone. Floridian’s are really sensitive about that and it is a swing state. Democrats cannot afford to ignore them. Michigan may be more forgiving.

    BTW in interest of full-disclosure: I voted for Hillary, but boy man was I on the fence. I would have (probably) voted for Edwards. Just so you know, I’ve come to my own conclusions without being some zealot for the candidate I ultimately chose. I’m also an independent and I like McCain and it’s a harder choice for me between him and Hillary (not so much Barak, who I feel is suffers from inexperience; nice enough guy though).

  • Bottom line: If either candidate gets the nomination without winning the most pledged delegates (excluding MI/FL), it will split the party and that Democrat will lose in November.

  • I agree with you on your call for BS up to the point where you start smashing on Hillary because she left her name on the ballot.

    The other candidates didn’t have to take their names off. It was their choice, and frankly BAD ADVICE from their campaign advisors.

  • I almost think that keeping the race alive until the last minute would be good for the general election. Reason being: it would show how much the Dems like both their prospects and it would disallow the GOP attack machine from bearing down on one person.

    What pisses me off is the idea that a candidate could win the primaries and delegates but lose because of the superdelegates.

  • It’s lunacy to argue that the Michigan and Florida results would have been remotely the same (in delegate count or otherwise) if all the candidates been on both ballots and campaigned in both states.

  • Zeit,

    Your talking about numbers, I’m talking about people having hushed conversations in smoke-filled back rooms.

    Besides at the moment Hillary does still have the lead, which means that the committee (I’m assuming the decision is simple majority) would lean in her favor.

    So again, unless Obama really pulls ahead I’m thinking the scenario I mention above is still likely.

  • @48
    “Everywhere Obama goes, he improves his numbers dramatically!”

    That is self-serving spin. You could say the same about HRC or any candidate, with no objective way to prove (or disprove) your case.

    @53

    Other scenarios also have the same drawbacks. You think punting away MI and FL is a path to victory? I agree it is a mess, but if BO winds up with a small lead in pledged delegates, there is no solution that does not PO a lot of people.

  • Greg, I don’t think I’m discounting the human element at all. Quite the contrary, honestly. What I see from the Obama campaign is a unique ability to motivate people. Just look at the money being raised in $50-$100 increments. Look at the way the polls from a few months ago compare to the actual results in states where he has campaigned.

    Think about it this way — if neither candidate had campaigned in any of the states, we can all probably agree that Hillary would already have the nomination at this point. Obama is where his is right now because of his ability to move people — to motivate them. He was denied that opportunity (as was Hillary!) in MI and FL because the democratic parties of those states chose to go against party policy.

    I can’t see denying the fact that the results would be different in those states had the elections there been held like they were everywhere else. I’m not saying Obama would have won — I’m not claiming to know what cannot be known — I’m simply saying that the results would have been different.

  • “The other candidates didn’t have to take their names off. It was their choice, and frankly BAD ADVICE from their campaign advisors.”

    This seems to suggest that you approve of Clinton to make a pledge to honor the DNC’s decision not to seat the MI delegates, then breaking it later…politics as usual.

    If that doesn’t bother you, then so be it. But I considered voting for Hillary until relatively recently. Her pattern of misbehavior since Iowa put me squarely into the Obama camp. So, in my case, any BAD ADVICE came from her advisers, not Obama’s or Edwards’ (I actually hold the candidates responsible for their own decisions).

  • Joe

    In Michigan yes, in Florida all the candidates Hillary, John and Barak were on the ballot. Florida law requires it.

    How much difference would campaigning in the state made? Probably not much at the time. Results would have been the same. If it were replayed today, may be a bit different, but is that somehow how more fair? No I don’t think so.

    Floridians had a very strange opportunity to not be lambasted with a bunch of targeted political advertisements. They made a decision based on information they had at hand, same as you, same as me. I find it quite insulting that people seem to forget that we’re talking about other people here, taking the time to go to polls and strike a ballot. They made their decision, who are you to second guess them?

  • “Besides at the moment Hillary does still have the lead…”

    Hillary has the lead in the total delegate count. If you take out the superdelegates, Obama has the lead in pledged delegates (the one’s selected by the voters).

  • Greg, come on…

    How much difference would campaigning in the state made? Probably not much at the time.

    Thinks about what you’re saying. Candidates spend MILLIONS of dollars campaigning. You’re implying that there’s no need for them to do this because it doesn’t matter?!?

  • Why do people always fuss about the rules of the game when they are losing the game, not before, not after and definitely not when they are winning?

    If this infighting keeps up the Dems are going to lose. Hey, I guess being an independent, I can live with it. Again, I like McCain just fine.

  • “You seem to think Hillary was the only name on the ballot in Michigan…”

    Totally irrelevant. Edwards’ and Obama’s names weren’t on it, and they didn’t campaign there. Had they broken their pledge (to their credit, they didn’t)…the results are likely to have been much different. As Joe said, it’s lunacy to believe otherwise.

  • Dave,

    Didn’t matter to me. I actively avoid campaign BS. I seek articles and commentary on the net and other sources. I don’t believe campaign spin. I do check out the candidates websites and spend a lot of time comparing their statements and their counter statements (love those fact checks…..what is a fact I wonder?)

    Yes I DO actually believe that Florida may have had a more clear less brain-drain-fill-me-up-with-BS time of it this year. Lucky bastards.

  • “How much difference would campaigning in the state made? Probably not much at the time. Results would have been the same.”

    Applying this logic, campaigns don’t matter. The candidates should just stay home and let the media take care of it.

    As I said…lunacy.

  • I can’t speak for FL, nor even really MI. But as a MI voter, i don’t want them seated. That was a fiasco brought on by our completely incompetent state legislature. We got screwed by everyone from our state reps, to the MDP, to the DNC. Most certainly, the MDP and the state legislature deserve most of the blame.

    There is another twist on this concerning Clinton’s name being on the ballot. Two of the biggest Dems in the state are huge Clinton supporters. One is a much (and unfairly) reviled Gov. who was not born in the States…so this position is about the end of her political career. She won’t challenge Stabenow for a Senate seat, and i can’t imagine her challenging Levin either. She’s angling for an administration post…just like our last Gov.

    I’m pissed about the primary, but i’ll be even more pissed if they seat the delegates. As far as i’m concerned, they should revoke our superdelegates too. Actually, they should especially revoke our superdelegates because they are the people who could have solved the mess.

    A re-running of the primary is unfeasible, partly because of cost and partly because we have an open primary…which would mean that the state republicans would get to vote twice.

    Bah, it was a goat-rodeo in the first place. Maybe some people learned their lesson, but since they’re politicians…probably not. If the DNC seats those delegates before the nomination is secure, i will vote 3rd party no matter who the nominee is. Punish us for someone else breaking the rules; not punish a candidate for breaking the rules; and then change the rules again at the end? Whatever…

    BTW, how come CA & NY didn’t get punished for moving their primaries up?

  • Dear strangley named Horselover Fat: -Greg

    It’s actually the name of the narrator character and stand-in for the author of a Philip K. Dick novel. Of course, that does not make HL’s attempt to include MI and FL delegates any more legitimate.

    The fact is they are out, and including them at this point will do more harm to the party than good.

    This is all very reminiscent of the Clintons’ fight against the ‘at-large’ precincts in Nevada (which is another time HL argued with me until he felt compelled to try to direct readers away from this site). Funny, when excluding voters supposedly helps Clinton, HL is all for it, and then when including voters (in an unfair contest) helps Clinton, HL is all for it. Shocking.

  • It’s hardly irrelevent. Hillary never pledged to take her name off the ballot. She pledged not to campaign or participate. Which really is open to interpretation. She wasn’t compelled to remove her name, it’s not a party rule or a state rule and other dems did the same (though not the other top 2). Some people (not me) say it was a power play by Obama’s camp. I don’t know about that, but this idea that Hillary lied about it is just stupid. She simply left her name on the ballot. Whoopdee doo.

    Here’ s an early writing on it. It’s about how pissed of Michigan was about the whole affair (I’m sure they’re still not particularly happy). They are the MOST effected by this, despite the now obvious potential benefit for Hillary’s campaign. It was their votes that don’t count. I don’t agree with the state moving their primary up, but taking votes away from American citizens is wrong wrong wrong! We should have a national primary. One day, winners take all.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1007/Off_the_balllot_in_Michigan.html

  • BTW, how come CA & NY didn’t get punished for moving their primaries up? -jackpine savage

    Because the cutoff was February 5th.

  • yes, your ar missing something. Dean is not trying to talk to
    Clinton or Obama, he is talking to the superdelegates.

  • “She pledged not to campaign or participate. Which really is open to interpretation.”

    Uh-huh.

  • Ok, I’d like to come clean with you all.

    I could accept Michigan getting the 100% punishment (or maybe they’ll get a piddly amount of delegates) because they attempted to…wait for it…shockingly….try to compete with IOWA…the holiest of holys!! for national attention. Everyone knows that IOWA being a major industrial state with so many people is SOOOO much more important than such an insignificantly populated, non-industrial, state as Michigan.

    Ok even if you buy that argument (obviously I don’t), I still think Florida should be reinstated. What harm did it do the status-quo for them to want to be the same week as South Carolina? None. Dick move on the dem side. Freakishly the republicans were so much more fair by only halving the delegates in the states that moved up their primaries.

    National Primary. or maybe we could do East Coast vs West Coast, or divide it by time zone!

  • Last time:

    She didn’t pledge to take her name off. It’s just that simple. You can give the moral or ethical high-ground to Edwards and Obama if you like, but I refuse to fault her for Michigan. Piddly Piddly issue.

    P.S. I was an Edwards supporter before he dropped out, and I never gave him props for this.

  • Greg, two things:

    1. I wasn’t really interested in how the lack of campaigns may have impacted YOUR vote specifically…I was challenging the notion that campaigning wouldn’t have impacted the overall vote in Florida. Big difference.

    2. The issue isn’t whether or not Florida should have been allowed to hold their primary when they did. The issue is that they were TOLD that it wouldn’t count if they held it on that day. The entire DNC had agreed on that. And they did it anyway! It sucks for the Florida voters, but the Florida democratic party brought in on themselves.

  • Greg’s link to politico.com has a quote from a “prominent DNC member from Michigan.” Not exactly indicative of “how pissed of Michigan was”. In fact, “uncommitted” did surprisingly well on the ballot, despite Hillary’s name being there.

  • “I refuse to fault her for Michigan. Piddly Piddly issue.”

    If those delegates are seated at the convention, and they put Hillary over the top…it’ll split the party. Not so piddly.

  • @71

    “Funny, when excluding voters supposedly helps Clinton, HL is all for it, and then when including voters (in an unfair contest) helps Clinton, HL is all for it. Shocking.”

    Tolstoy effect. Aka confirmation bias. I am just so totally not on Teh Awesome Obama express.

  • Joe,

    You really like campagin rhetoric I see. Well good for you!

    Personally I think it’s a waste of airwaves and money. Good for some economies I guess. I’ll concede some of your point that I’m not entirely sure that there’s a better way…but this is the information age, and I like to think I’m using it to find out stuff for myself, rather than having it shoved down my throat.

    Hey maybe we should just have a national lottery every four years. Any joker who’s name is picked gets the office. Woo hoo! That would be fun. 😛

    Sometimes I wish we were more like the Biritish. Those guys tear eachother apart. There’s not so much BS niceties between them, it’s YOU SUCK YOU WANKER! I can go for that, it’s not civil, but it’s honest. It’s also not dribble about “coming together”. I don’t want to come together. I want my whopper my way! ;-D

  • I am a loyal democrat. I want us to beat the republicans. Sometimes, when I can, I give a small donation to the party. Usually I am emailed by Howard Dean. I remember Mr. Dean from when he was a populist candidate in the last election and I respect his judgment and integrity. Today, and I believe yesterday, and the day before as well Mr. Dean asked me to donate to help fight John McCain. I believe that this is a necessary battle that all democrats must participate in, from all states. I want to make this donation, I really do. That is why I am going to give Mr. Dean and the DNC my donation, but not without a condition that I believe should be met. I am going to tell the DNC that I will donate $10 (which is all I am able to at this time) only after the DNC has announced that the delegates from Florida and Michigan have been seated. I believe it is only fair that if we help the DNC, then the DNC should help us too. They say they want to run a 50 State campaign, right on their website. There website is http://www.democrats.org/. I think we should hold them to their promise to our party. So I call upon all of you who read my post to pass it along and email or call Mr. Dean and the DNC and pledge your donation to fight John McCain and the republican party, but only after the Florida and Michigan delegates have been seated. If you are able to donate more money, then pledge more money, (lots of money if you have it, it is for a good cause) but let him know that your donation comes with a price. Show him what it will cost him to cast aside these voters in Florida and Michigan who are loyal party members. These people’s voices must be heard, they are part of our party and the future of our party. Donate to make sure that we are the party of all the people. Here is a link for you to tell Mr. Dean to seat the delegates if he wants your support.
    http://www.democrats.org/page/petition/chairman
    Or you can call the DNC number for problems or questions about contributions and tell them about you dilemma. That number is 877-336-7200.

  • JR, the Party is already split. Seating the delegates may split it more, but it’s a very fair argument that they are simply counting people’s votes (ok, more so with Florida).

    Getting back to the root of this article, Howard Dean may actually be the party saviour after all. His 50 state solution is inspiring (and they said it couldn’t be done) and maybe JUST MAYBE he’ll be able to broker something from this Hillary/Barak war that is acceptable to all.

    With McCain as the nominee (assumption here) it is going to be a dog fight the whole way. The Dems do not have the luxury of keeping this internal fight up. McCain will have all the time and all the money to beat on both of them and also start striking that general election centrist cord that we’re all so used to hearing.

  • Solution:
    1. Superdelegates pledge to vote for the winner of the popular vote in their state.
    2. Michigan and Florida stage new caucuses or primaries in which both sides campaign for a set period of time funded by the Democratic Party.
    3. Loser gets the vice-presidency.

  • #42: Additionally, there is no cost effective or reasonable way to hold a new primary.

    Au contraire, doubtful. They could mail a ballot to every registered voter just like they do in Oregon for every candidate in every election, and do a legitimate primary strictly by mail. Not only would that work with virtually no cost (no polling booths need to be opened at all), but it would clearly point the way for a sane elections system in a state that arguably has the most insane one of all fifty states.

    It would, of course, work equally well in Michigan. That’s where I wish Dean would be steering this thing.

  • Dave,

    Sorry missed your post.

    My vote is probably not completely irrelevent to compare with other voters. I’m sure that any serious voter did some research on the candidate they chose. You may feel differently, but I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. Also there’s certainly been enough media coverage to get people interested enough in reading-up.

    On point #2, I know. The state party F’d up. Somehow they should be held accountable, but how about just stripping the state party of their official affiliation and implant some DNC folks to run the show (kinda like putting them into some kind of receivership) instead of sticking it to the voters?

  • Democratic Chairman Howard Dean said he doesn’t want the Clinton-Obama race continuing into the party’s convention in Denver, saying the candidates should “make some kind of an arrangement” if neither has enough delegates to win the nomination.

    So, will he force one to withdraw, or push for a joint ticket.? Because of age, if nothing else, that would be Clinton/Obama. With Obama as Vice President, we might witness some of the most inspiring tributes ever at funerals for world leaders and other politicians. The worry is that Mr. Obama may be so inspiring that the politician may rise from the dead.

  • A brokered back room deal would be much more damaging to the party than letting this process play out at the convention. What could garner more television air time and ratings and without thwarting democracy? Sign my letter to Howard Dean asking him to stay out of the nominating process – http://www.camperky.com

  • Homer now that is funny!

    Though I agree, it would be hard to argue (in a draw) for Obama/Clinton. Clinton would be very old in 8 years (no offense there Hillary). Obama however would still be in his prime.

    There’s lots and lots of chatter on the web about a joint ticket, why it’s a good idea, why it may or may not happen. I guess we’ll all see.

  • Camper,

    If the two candidates agree, it’s really their choice is it not? I suppose you could argue that it’s really the voters choice, but if it stays this close, nearly a draw then I think it’s up to them.

    A backroom deal wouldn’t be so bad, so long as they both came out smiling. 16 years later we’ll get to read the book and all the gorey details. 😉

  • Dan S — I like it (although, I’d leave recommendation no. 3 up to the candidates).

    President Lindsay — you have my vote.

    I’m an Obama guy. Can I get a second from a Clinton supporter?

  • Greg,

    Don’t get me wrong — I’m not inclined to discount how much preparation went into people’s votes. All I’m really saying is that I think the Obama campaign machine is very good at what it does. Sure, lots of people would have voted the same either way. I personally believe MORE people would have voted if the campaigns had been allowed in the state. To me it’s just painfully obvious that in some way, it would have been different…and you just can’t count results of a contest held under one set of rules and make it count as though it were held under a different set of rules.

    Coming up with SOME way to re-hold the election in FL/MI seems like the only reasonable solution to me.

  • Au contraire, doubtful. They could mail a ballot to every registered voter just like they do in Oregon for every candidate in every election, and do a legitimate primary strictly by mail. -President Lindsay

    Let me preface this by saying I agree that the primaries should be entirely mailed ballots. I think we had a lengthy discussion about this way back when we were waxing on about the silliness of caucusing.

    But you’d have to mail a ballot to every citizen of voting age in the states. With return postage. That’s not as cheap as you imply, especially when you’ve already paid for primaries and you have no other races to worry about (remember, it’s only the Presidential race that has no delegates, the primaries counted for other races).

    You also have to consider that since they are open primaries you’d be giving any voters who voted in the Republican primary a chance to vote twice.

    There simply is no way to fairly include them at this point.

  • So far, no Hillary supporters have seconded Craig’s motion (it’s only been five minutes or so).

    But I think Craig’s post underscores my feeling that Obama supporters are not afraid for him to go to any state, run an honest campaign and let the voter’s decide. If Hillary won again, in a second Florida or Michigan primary or caucus, with proper ballots and campaigns…then this Obama supporter could vote for her in the general. But trying to get delegates by breaking her promise to Dean, the people of IA/NH/NV/SC and her pledge with the other candidates is fundamentally dishonest.

    By the way, blake (comment no. 83) is justifiably mad. But I agree that needs to direct his anger at his state party, not the national party.

  • “So far, no Hillary supporters have seconded Craig’s motion (it’s only been five minutes or so).”

    In principle, I see no problem. (assume this relates to post 87) But it’s not up to us. And there are little details like cost, Republican voters, plus probably stuff I haven’t thought of that would need to be addressed.

  • Anne, your guy Edwards may wish he’d stayed in a bit longer. Even had he picked up a handful of delegates on Super Duper Tuesday – 74 or so to get his total to 100 – he might have been in the position to completely broker the convention all by his little lonesome!

  • Why Michigan and Florida will not/can not have a new Presidential primary:

    1. Cost: No matter how it’s conducted, they’ve already spent their money for the primary. That money has to come from somewhere else. Show me a state with a burgeoning surplus right now? I can only imagine the shitstorm that would brew from the usual loud voices of small government talking about what a waste of money this would be.

    2. Fairness: The open primary format allows for crossovers. How do you prevent people who voted in the Republican primary from voting again? There are also fairness issues that pertain to other candidates who have dropped out since MI and FL.

    3. Rules: Regrettably the voters end up being punished, but the elected officials of Michigan and Florida broke the rules knowing the consequences before hand. If they don’t like it, they have the wonderful opportunity to vote the bums out come their next election.

    4. Time: There isn’t enough time to set this up and execute it meaningfully. We’ll already be at the convention by the time all of the details are hammered out, if they ever could be.

    I hate that so many feel their voices weren’t heard and that there was nothing they could do about it, but after the fact is not the right time to try to address this. There isn’t going to be another vote and there is no fair way to include those delegates unless a clear nominee is chosen prior to the convention.

  • Dear DNC:

    There is no way I would support a brokered arrangement where upon the nominee is selected through back door dealings. Most certainly this would favor the Clintons, who are part of the democratic establishment and to whom many owe “favors”. If it has to be decided, let the people decide. Allow Florida and Michigan to redo their primaries so both candidates can officially campaign there. Count the number of delegates each has received. Decide on who goes forward based on who The People voted for…otherwise, it will be just like Bush/Gore in 2000 where the Supreme Court decided it. No thanks!

    Personally, I think Obama is the better candidate in the general election. He won the red states. Hillary just won what the democrats always win and who would support WHOEVER won the nomination. Can’t say the reverse, Hillary will never win the red states, they hate her.

    Please, be fair. I am a life long democrat but will sit this one out if it stinks. The only way I could support Hillary — who is as divisive as Bush and is fighting the same 60s culture wars the country has grown tired of — is if she wins the democratic convention fair and square. Please, don’t broker the convention, don’t reverse your stand on Florida and Michigan unless EVERYONE is allowed to campaign there.

    Thank you,

    P.S. Oh, and Clinton Pres, Obama VP is totally offensive and reeks. Don’t go there.

  • Kennedy/Johnson? Reagan/Bush? It’s been done before. The crowd at the last debate loved it.

  • “Howard Dean STOLE my vote…YEEHAARARH!!!”

    The Movie Idiocracy, although Fox chose NOT to promote it to a mass audience…is winding up as life imitating art (and I’m not just talking about the fictitious soda “brawndo” which played a big part in the movie and now is being sold to America in real life). We don’t have to wait until the future to get stupid…WE’RE ALREADY THERE…

    To PROVE my point to you I present Dr. Howard Dean the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Yea the Scream Guy from back in 2004, remember him? This brain trust of society who claims to have a 50-state strategy of giving the White House back to yearning Democrats decided to go ahead and remove Michigan and Florida’s Democratic Delegates, and in Florida he did that after the Republicans in Florida changed the Primary Day, not Democrats…and then just to show how much of a Cowboy he really is he visits Florida a week later which is now a Ghost State to him to raise MONEY…Oh, I’m not done…Then it turns out he raises about 100,000 bucks, if you can believe that?

    Now the point here is that the ONLY Smart Guys in the room are Republicans…Why, you ask?

    Think about this…If republicans really want to face Hillary in the general election, because they know they would just CRUSH her with any opponent…Would they be telling you right now? Go ahead take a moment to consider that… Karl Rove and Ari Fleischer are going to a Gunfight with Democrats and they’re going to TELEGRAPH the fact that they are just Jonesing to take on Hillary…right? No people IF their lips are moving, then they are LYING TO YOU…Republicans are trying to make Democrats come to a Gunfight with a Knife, and I expect the Fox driven Conservative Media to attempt to Bamboozle America, the real crazy thing is that the Liberal Media who are making tons of money from this W.W.E style battle with Clinton and Obama are really chugging the Jim Jones cool-aide hard.

    The dumb sheep that are liberal democrats just follow along thinking that if they want to put a democrat in the white house, the way to do it is to get the most liberal democrat they can find, disenfranchise the state that’s always thrown the whole thing…Florida…and send the least experienced democrat ever up against John McCain…Yea just keep drinking that “brawndo” folks…Hank Strange predicts in 09 we’re going to have another Republican in the White House…Our kids are going to be the “poster children” around the world for stupidity…and our crops will stop growing if you water them with cool-aide or “brawndo” or whatever other crap Fox comes up with.

    Hank Strange.

    http://www.hankstrange.com/

  • This is my first and probably the last post this site. I really liked this site until I started to get the feeling that people participating in this forum are biased against Hillary. I can’t understand WHY you guys can’t apply the analytical skills and throw your support for Hillary. Obama is a good speaker with lots of rhetoric which does not backup his previous records.

    The guy is smart but not qualified to be President compared to what Hillary has to offer. Obama is winning the red states where democrats hardly win the general election. The most of money which he is getting is from AA and college kids who don’t have any idea what there future is going to look like if another republican president gets the white house for four years.

    GO HILLARY!!!!!

  • doubtful @ 95 writes of the mail-in primary idea: But you’d have to mail a ballot to every citizen of voting age in the states. With return postage. That’s not as cheap as you imply, especially when you’ve already paid for primaries and you have no other races to worry about (remember, it’s only the Presidential race that has no delegates, the primaries counted for other races). You also have to consider that since they are open primaries you’d be giving any voters who voted in the Republican primary a chance to vote twice.

    Well, there are about 12 million people of voting age in Florida. You wouldn’t mail a ballot to any registered republicans for the very reason you mentioned, so that would probably drop it down to about 7 million tops. You get the postal service to do it for next to nothing, which can be done, and just printing up the ballots with nothing but the presidential vote on it wouldn’t amount to much of a cost per ballot for printing. I just don’t see that the cost is prohibitive, but your mileage may vary. Still more practical than trying to do it any other way, IMHO.

  • @104

    Problem is that the Republican legislature would never authorize a redo. They are having too much fun laughing their butts off at the current situation.

  • Would it really be so bad to have the nomination decided at the convention?

    We’d have the nation’s undivided attention, unlike the typical “coronation” conventions.

    While we’ve got their attention, we can show that it’s the Democrats’ policies and concerns that more closely represent the American people. And we can pre-empt the mudslinging that we know is coming.

    We can also remind America that we got into this situation precisely because of our commitment that all votes should count — if we had “winner take all” primaries, whereby McCain got all the delegates by winning just over a third of the vote, we’d have a frontrunner, too.

    All we have to do is remain civil while we publicly disagree.

  • Even at the left-of-center, ego takes precident over both the cause and actually winning. Obama and Clinton would each prefer to be nominated rather than have the party win the presidency.

  • A few facts are worth stressing here:

    1. HRC supported the DNC decision to strip delegates from these states. Then, after she realized that she “won” in these states’ beauty contests and Obama’s support was surging, she decided to change the rules. Thus, she and her supporters are supporting a ‘re-do’, not Obama. Such a move reeks of political opportunism and a lack of principles, chief conservative criticisms of the Clintons for more than 20 years.

    2. The MI/FL ‘elections’ were so badly compromised that they do not meet the minimal qualifications for a fair election. In both cases, voters were told beforehand that their vote would not count — this dramatically altered actual voting participation. Secondly, the Michigan vote was a Soviet-style sham in which two of the three major candidates were not listed, nor could they be written in (thank you, MI state officials who are also, conveniently, Clinton supporters). To count these ill-gotten delegates towards a nomination would be morally wrong and legally dubious, regardless of who benefits. Third, campaigning is an absolutely necessary step, giving each candidate the chance to talk to the electorate. To say it isn’t necessary is to say that we should have just had a national primary a year ago, without the need to let the candidates actually talk to the voters.

    3. Neither candidate can win without the other’s supporters. While each candidate polls well, neither could beat McCain on their own. Since changing the rules of the game at this point is a non-starter, I suggest that Clinton supporters stop trying to force HRC on the rest of us using discredited, sham elections and advocate a solution acceptable to both sides. If you think that HRC will win the general election by getting her there with any means necessary, you’re living in a dream world. Do you really think that Clinton could win over Obama supporters, independents and disillusioned Republicans if she forces FL/MI delegates to be seated? A historical reminder: Clinton may only win the states that Kerry won as it is, and that’s not enough electoral votes to win! Obama, on the other hand, is competitive in swing states and could force Republicans to spend money defending red states, whereas Clinton will win the same old blue states and nothing else.

    4. In a related point, FL/MI voters ought to stop threatening to boycott a general election if their ‘vote’ in the sham primary doese not result in seated delegates. First, it’s unlikely the Democrats will carry Florida anyway; secondly, the millions of Obama supporters nationwide would be alienated by such a move dwarfs the Democratic voting population of both states. The state democratic officials in both states agreed to hold their primaries early, despite numerous warnings by the DNC — yes, it sad to punish the voters in these states, but then again, these same voters put these officials in power. Make them answerable for their actions, not the rest of us.

    5. There are only three reasonable ways forward: 1) new elections in both states, 2) continuation of the DNC rule that stripped their delegates, or 3) seating a symbolic number of delegates that will not affect the final outcome.

    Please, please, please stop escalating this, HRC supporters! Abide by the rules set by all candidates, regardless of personal affiliation.

  • What could the Democrats do? How does sixteen years of Democratic rule sound?
    How about two terms of Clinton and two terms of Obama– Clinton wins on her ability to fight the Republicans and Obama takes the lead in creating the future. Put Bill in charge of something that will keep him too busy to get in the way. Come on, these are liberal politicians, and politics has been known to create odd partnerships before.

  • I don’t see any of these proposals related to the Michigan and Florida delegates or to the super delegates actually working. The numbers are just too close at this point. There’s a certain merit in apportioning super delegates based on the electoral value of the states the candidates won (that’s how you win the election), but Obama supporters will never go for that.

    The only idea that has real merit, appeal, and likely acceptance by both parties involved is RonChusid’s suggestion that an agreement be made in advance as to how the convention will play out. This will control the potential for major damage to the eventual nominee. I think that’s about all that can be done if the prevailing winds maintain the current stalemate, but it’s not inconsequential. They’re have been some very ugly conventions in the past: McGovern in 1972 and Carter in 1980. Carter’s renomination win was pretty much slimed by Teddy Kennedy’s actions on the dais. It was one of the most embarrassing things I’ve ever watched.

  • Is it possible that he could leverage whomever is behind in delegates (or popular vote) to accept the VP (plus other power sharing)? If the candidates won’t accept this, the DNC could withdraw support from them in 2012 since their stubbornness would likely cause the Dems to lose in 2008.

    Or he can threaten to bring in an alternative compromise ticket such as Al Gore/Donna Brazille, in which case neither Obama or Clinton will get anything in 2008 if they can’t come to an agreement.

    Crazy?

  • I am really enjoying this discussion for its high mindedness. All of you all have really posted some thoughtful responses. That being the case, we should not count FL/MI the way they are. Either run a caucus or not count them.

    Superdelegates are also problematic. Should have to vote with their states.

  • Let’s see the Republican Legislature of Fl set the primary date. The DNC punishes the Florida Democrats. I love this in a state were being close allowed the 2000 election to be stolen. Nice
    wonder what the republican legislature was thinking when they did this.

    By the way I am a registered Republican. Who did not vote in the primary since I plan to vote for whoever the Democrats nominate this year. Nothing to choose on my party. You know a war we were lied into, plus I love my environment.

  • *If no one has clinched by mid-March, the solution is for Dean to jump in the race.” 🙂

    ==================================================================
    Oh man, I am so ditto on that.

    Howard Dean has at least 2 votes!!

    Dean/Obama=Dream Ticket

  • Everyone complaining about their vote not counting needs to shut up. You have no guarantee of your vote counting in a primary. If the party wanted to have only superdelegates deciding the candidate, they could do that. Your votes counts in the general election, that’s the only thing that you are promised.
    And again, Florida Dems, you could have easily moved the date of your primary. It happened in South Carolina (Republican primary on Jan. 19, Democratic on Jan. 26) as well as several other states. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the Florida Democratic officials who decided that they were above following party rules. To give in now tells states that the rules don’t matter, which would only create more trouble for the DNC in 2012.
    And I bet the DNC would be willing to kick in the money necessary to run a whole new primary, if it meant that it would fix the problems.

  • Post #15 – I agree, the state parties violated the agreements they accepted the year before. The irony today is, if they had just left their primaries on the original dates, they would be the king maker. Karma.

  • don’t know if this has been mentioned yet (sorry; can’t stay awake to read all the comments), but it occurs to me that dean can easily put the situation to them this way:

    do you love winning more than you love your party, or your country? if you two continue to duke it out for the next five months, wasting precious time and money on a battle between you when we need to be applying all that energy to fighting the repugs, then we’ll seriously risk losing everything to those who have already damn near ruined what was once a great nation. all will be lost. are either of you willing to contribute any further to that possibility?

    the fact that the two of you are so close in the eyes of our democratic citizens is a good testament to how few the real differences are. i have every faith that each of you recognizes what is at stake and will work tirelessly, just as you have so far, to achieve what is truly important here, which is NOT simply winning, but turning back this godforsaken gang of thugs who have taken over our government.

    and oh, if you don’t agree to this agreement, i’ll expose both of you as selfish frauds. the inevitable loss at that point would be no less devastating than what we’re faced with if you insist on persisting with this self-destructive battle.

    so, winner is prez, loser VP; i’ll flip it, an 1878 silver dollar my daddy gave me. fitting, doncha thin’?
    lady’s call, hillary.

  • Has anyone seen Al Gore lately? Might he be the “solution” Howard Dean is looking for?

  • Well, since i am a Michigan voter let me put in my point of view.

    Howard dean is a moron first of all. He should have done exactly as the Republicans did and penalized FL/MI by only counting HALF of their delegates to be seated at the convention. Only makes sense. These states wanted more influence in the primaries and by making them half as influential in the primary it makes the point.

    Secondly, There is no way you can count the michigan democrat ballot as being even kinda legitimate. It was a complete farce and everyone knew their votes didnt count if you voted democratic so many instead of being able to vote FOR a candidate took a republican ballot so they could vote AGAINST a candidate. Didnt you wonder why the turnout for republicans was so high in michigan?

    And thirdly, they agreed to the rules before they started. You can’t change the rules half way through. I dont care who it helps. MI/FL should not count period. End of story… these are the rules as printed on the inside of the Monopoly box. Go Directly to General Election, Do not Pass Denver. Do not Collect 200 delegates.

  • #80. Who would want to split the party? DLC. Hillary has already said she didn’t have to abide by DNC rules.I wish it would split. DLC could call themselves new republicans. While I’m dreaming…

  • My wife who is the democrat in the family is not a member of the Party Machine. But I guess you righteous dems will say she could had forced the state party machine to do what she wanted. Sort of like those who think the super-delegates have to much power are going to make the DNC change it’s rules. Of course the primary votes should not count but when people call them worthless it ranks a lot of people here. Me I am a Republican I did not vote.

  • .32 bcinaz said: “Pick a date in June; let MI and FL hold an open Democratic primary; each candidated gets to keep their superdelegate endorsements up to this point, the rest have to be alloted based on their states primary results. John Edwards has to either endorse and deliver his delegates or release them. I don’t think the outcome will be tied by the time we get to the Convention. They really haven’t done very much yet to break the tie.”

    John Edwards released his delegates the day after he suspended his campaign. His delegates are free to go where they want.

  • Here’s hoping that the true Democrats realize that there is Movement happening.
    Do we really want to go backwards (Hillary) or do we want to get with the Movement that
    Obama just happens to be riding, and get America back.

    Hillary anywhere on the ticket will kill the Movement,

    I (64 year old retired guy – life long Denocrat) will vote republican, across the board, if the Movement is killed !

  • An obvious solution would be a gentleman’s agreement whereby Hillary accepts a single term with Obama as VP and Obama gets to succeed her when the four years are up. This would be subject to certain conditions, obviously. For instance, Obama would have to keep his reputation clean for the four years and have to agree to follow through on some of Hillary’s key progranms after assuming power. There would have to be something in place to make it very difficult for Hillary to change her mind after four years. Making the agreement semi-public might be enough because the Republicans could use it against her in 2012 if she didn’t follow through.

  • Since the candidates are NOW tied, its the perfect time to press for RULES moving forward. It needs to come from the SOURCE. I say get the candidates TOGETHER, on tape, and have them both read the following message to the superdelegates:

    “We as Democrats believe in democracy. It is the not only our guiding principle, it is the root word of the very name of our party. We are both fighting hard to be your candidate for President. It has been a tough campaign, and each vote has been valuable. You, as a superdelegate hold what is the equivilent of 10,000 votes!! We implore you, as superdelegates, to not usurp the will of the people. Please support either of us, based on the vote of the people. We have promised each other to rally behind the winner as well. If Hillary is the winner, I will support her. If Barack is the winner, I will support him. At the end of the primary season, we both ask you to clearly get behind and rally the party and clearly support either of us, based on the choice of the people. We need to be a party united coming into the convention, not one fractured. We ask you to unite the party, which is the original intent of the creation of your status as a superdelegate. Thank you for your time, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Democratic candidates for President. We both approve this message!!!!

  • Hey Ron! Lifelong Democrat. Here I am a Republican going to vote democrat because of the war and the environment and the economy no matter who the candidate is and you say you would vote republican? 100 years of war, more tax cuts for the rich and deficits? wow I was thinking of becoming a Democrat but if you and some other Obama followers are the example of what the Democrats are like sorry I see no difference. Not trying to be personal but if you can’t vote for Hillary and she wins the nomination just don’t vote. I voted for Kerry in 2004 and have been voting for Corrine Brown ever since I moved to Florida, I am not one who believes you have to live by the party line, but McCain would be a disaster as bad or worse than Bush. My opinion for what it’s worth.

  • Florida and Michigan voters are suffering, not because of Howard Dean, but because of their respective state Democratic party’s leadership. NOT.

    The real story in Florida is that the GOP dominated Legislature (3 to 1 GOP) passed a bill filed by Representative David Rivera (R) from District 112 which stretches from Miami to Naples. Speaker Marco Rubio (R) from Miami is quoted saying “We have people who get invited to a big party where they drop a balloon and people wear funny hats but they don’t have any role to play.” This is a typical play by the GOP dominated Florida legislature.

    I am a Florida voter who is really pissed that my vote will not count in this important year of change. The GOP stole the election in 2004 thanks to Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, the Florida Secretary of State at the time. BUT she got “hers” as her buddie Jeb Bush and the GOP party undermined her campaign when she ran for U.S. Senate. With friends like Jeb and Co. she does not need any enemies.

  • Hold a mail in primary for all registered Democrats in Michigan and Florida, place the delegates where they fall.

    Superdelegates, like it or not cannot have a role in this election that is anything other than what was set up before the process began. It CANNOT be changed mid-stream into something new and different unless it’s done between election cycles. THOSE ARE THE RULES.

    Not following the set forth rules would anger many Democrats and I wouldn’t be suprised if we stayed home on election day.

    • Comments are closed.