Hillary, YOU Don’t Get to Decide to Seat Our Delegates
This is probably going to get me kicked out of the MDP, but this is bullshit.
Statement by Senator Hillary Clinton on the Seating of Delegates at the Democratic National Convention
I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee.
I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan. I know not all of my delegates will do so and I fully respect that decision. But I hope to be President of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention.
I hope my fellow potential nominees will join me in this.
I will of course be following the no-campaigning pledge that I signed, and expect others will as well.
Its bullshit for a number of reasons. Hillary is pretending that this matter won’t be decided, by the party, well before her delegates get to Denver. She’s pretending the decision hasn’t already been made that, once it becomes clear a candidate has the nomination, the DNC will announce that MI’s and FL’s delegates will be seated in Denver. And she’s pretending that she can somehow give us voice in the nomination process, when MI’s Clusterfuck has already guaranteed we will have no voice.
It’s a shameless pander to Florida’s voters, an incredibly dangerous move suggesting that Hillary might someday try to claim MI’s and FL’s delegates to contribute to her total, and it’s a nasty cynical tactic that cheapens my vote.
OUR state gambled with the Clusterfuck and lost. That’s an issue between us, our party leaders, and the DNC. But it is not your place, Hillary, to swoop in and make it better. And to suggest it is your place really, really, risks damaging the party.
Back during the Clusterfuck, I scoffed when people said Hillary would try to seat MI’s delegates. Such a tactic would only be tried, I thought, by a reckless person who put herself above the larger good.
Apparently I was wrong. About Hillary, that is. Not about the recklessness of this.
Maybe she’s feeling desperate about how the campaign is going?
Bob in HI
Wow – so upset – some how the party has to work this out and being hot under the collar does not contribute.
Remember it is hard ball politics. We need to remember the Republicans will play hard ball and our candidate needs to be in fighting shape.
This is not a matter of hardball. This is a matter of putting one’s self ABOVE the party. It shows the same kind of recklessness that our current president does, for the same reasons–a willingness to take actions with no regard for the consequences of those actions, all to achieve a short-term good.
The notion that, in a game of hardball politics, Hillary Clinton will wind up on top is laughable. She is the most hated candidate of all even before entering into the race.
And the mettle of her campaign team against the likes of Rove and the swift-boaters will be tried and found severely wanting.
If Hillary gains the Dem nomination, she will go down to defeat against any Republican opponent. (Please don’t quote the polls which show her on top. Anyone who trusts a poll at this point truly has effluent for brains.)
The strength of her candidacy won’t matter. She will be outmanuevered by dirtier political players. And she won’t be able to respond in kind. Why? Because if she does, it will simultaneously reinforce the impression that she is a cynical manipulator, and undercut her notion that a woman can unite and not divide. (Bill Clinton would have fared little better. It was his good fortune to be matched against G.H.W. Bush and Bob Dole.)
This is the inherent weakness of her campaign, and there are numerous soft spots within it that are deeply vulnerable to attack on these lines.
You are correct. And there are current poles that show her losing to John McCain.
If you wish to galvanize the Republican base, and rouse the Independents that gave Bush the all time high voter count in 2004, Hillary is the one to do it.
With all due respect; this is a complete pile of manure. I, in the worst way, do NOT want the general election to devolve into a Rove/swiftboat type of angry battle. But, if that is what occurs, the Clintons are the best equipped and most adept at defending against it and taking it to the other side. If you are worried about being “outmanuevered by dirtier political players” as you allege, then you better pray that Bill and Hillary Clinton are on your team. But that doesn’t appear to be your real agenda, ranting against the Clintons for the sheer sake of doing it seems to be the agenda. I am not a big fan of Hillary’s candidacy, but I find myself constantly defending the Clintons in the face of the absolutely insane and unfocused vitriol being spewed by people that just don’t like them. I have no problem, even understand to a large extent, the emotional opinions of people to the Clintons; I share many of them. But the way you have manifested it is factually unsupportable by what has occurred to date, is muddled and wrongheaded and is counter-productive. You talk about the trashiness of the Clintons, but here you are spewing false vitriol at them instead of saying something positive about what you think is better. You are what you complain of; take a look in the mirror.
In case you hadn’t noticed, Marcy tends to be, along with enthusiastic, considerably more intelligent and prescient than the run of the mill. And who better to understand the nuances as relates to the MI situation.
It just happens to be not just Michigan’s ox that is being gored this time. The Clinton’s display their fondness for blood sport, admittedly a Republican avocation as well, but decidedly a risky game.
How long do we think it will be before the explosive unpredictability of the Monica scandal, and the many other Clinton shadows will be visited upon Hillary (and Bill) as she treads so close to the margins? Non sequtur? I think not. You may argue that this is just prep for the Republicans. But that, I think, is the real non-sequitur.
Excellent, Marcy. I think Billary are well on the way to at least losing my vote (Washington State). I think they are playing with fire on this matter and the Bill Clinton intervention strategy.
EW, I am in complete agreement on this one.
a daily lurker here…Sen. Clinton’s campaign style has really disappointed me. i’ll be canvassing for Sen. Obama tomorrow, as the primary is all I got.
I guess I’ll vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination, but I live in Utah so I won’t have to feel too bad about it.
monzie and ballerinaX, why not Edwards?
Sen. Obama’s Experience in constitutional Law,as well as his legislative career, along with his philosophy of power from the people not over the people. I Like Edwards,and I’m delighted he is gaining this week,But I find I actually am moved by Mr. Obama’s inclusiveness and deep grassroots commitment. I feel like transformative change can be a reality if a strong and inspired majority of Americans are standing behind it. I’ll admit I am also a sucker for symbolism and what an American like Mr. Obama could say about real Americans globally.That said, three generations of white women in my family,mother 67, sister 24 myself 44, are working on this campaign. My mother will not vote for Sen.Clinton under any circumstances. I’m non LDS Born and raised in SLC. I would like to see any combination of Edwards and Obama on a Dem. Ticket.
I am 66 years old and live in Michigan, at least Hillary stood up to be counted. My person was Biden, but the farm land of Iowa took him out.
I have watched the campaigns of Stevenson, Gene McCarthy, Mondale, McGovern, Dukacus, Humphery, Gore and Kerry loose. All good people. The Clintons won twice. I am tired of loosing. Could I suggest the this time we need to bury the hatchet and move on and win this one. We all know the Republicans play hardball and they have money.
Aw, she’s letting MI and FL sit at the table with the big people!
It takes a village…
Marcy,
This was not unexpected. Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi have both stated in the past that once we (I’m from Florida) had a nominee, our delegates would probably be seated. Obama or Edwards will do the same if one of them gets the nomination.
I think you’re missing the point. I point out in the post that the decision has already been made to seat the delegates. So for anyone–Hillary or Obama or whomever–to make a statement pretending they have any say over seating the delegates, it’s just a cheap, stupid ploy.
So first of all, she’s making a cheap stupid ploy.
But then she suggests that if our delegates are seated we will have a voice.
That’s where I begin to get pissed off. I won’t have a voice, whether or not I’m on the floor of the convention, and her telling me that coming to Denver gives me a voice is just insulting.
And finally, there’s the cost-benefit calculation. Obama and Edwards played by the rules. Hillary did not. That’s not a problem so long as Hillary doesn’t try to get any advantage from not playign by the rules. But this is the first step to doing so. And it risks really ripping the party apart. So I find it reckless and, quite frankly, a sign that if she’s elected she will be almost as reckless and stupid as Bush.
The rationale behind HRC’s message is to influence the woeful Democrats in Florida. Just as you stated. It is pandering. As well as a blatant political attempt to rally Democratic voters to her side.
Will it work? Sure, to some extent. The poor ol’ Florida Democrats (and to a lessor extent, the Michigan bereaved) are just yearning for an ear as they tearfully sob in their beer.
Really? Isn’t that what campaigns are all about?
Tis in the eye of the beholder. What one will or will not support in a political campaign says much about oneself as well as a candidate.
Every time Hillary does something like this, it only convinces me that she is the best choice for our party. I want someone who fights to win. The GOP never plays by the rules, and if we want to beat them, we have to be just as tough.
Indeed, this is bluntly the opportunistic tactic that would surely relish the already tilled fields of a unitary executive office. Yes indeed, Hillary could reap what Cheney had sown.
Uhh, kicked out of the “MDP”? Multi-disciplinary program? Manic-Depressive Psychosis (You’re in a band!) The Mestsky Detsky Parlament, which is better known in Bratislava City?
Hold on… Michigan Democratic Party?
Oddly, lots of disappointed lefty columnists were pounding on Billary even before this latest.
So – tell me when do the rules come in when fighting with the Republicans?
Obama is in front of the Detroit Economic Club telling automotive they have to step up to gas milage standards.
I agree with him, but that is not a fight I would have picked this time around.
Rules are there to protect the larger institutions that make them.
Hillary may win with this ploy. But it will be at the great expense of the party. Now maybe you believe parties are expendable. I don’t–I envision a day when someone not named Clinton or Bush can be elected, and that’s only going to happen with a real party.
Don’t get me wrong. I thikn Hillary has run a brilliant, almost faultless campaign so far. I think her ferocity will be great if she’s the nominee. But if she ruins the party along the way, I’m not sure it’s a worthwhile trade.
I agree about the party enforcing the rules; however the candidates are free to make decisions about how they will handle the convention if they get the nomination. That’s two different stages of the process.
Ahhh, the establishment rears its ugly head. There there EW, rules are for the little people, not the Village Members. If Obama and Edwards got their names off the ballot, Clinton could have managed it. She’s no dummy. She hedged her bets. Too bad for the folks in MI in FL whose voices weren’t lifted for Hillary. But for those who supported her, they’ll get a seat at the table. How nice.
I’m with you EW, the whole clusterfuck stinks. And we also shouldn’t have a system where the field of choices has been reduced to 2 or 3 before the majority of voters get to have a say. It’s time to implement a fair primary process. NH and IA can get a turn, but they have to give everyone else a turn, too.
Meanwhile lets remember that George got elected twice. We are dealing with a electorate that puts up yellow ribbons and thinks the war is going well in Iraq because George and the Media say so.
Think Slick Mitt or McKain and Huckabee to solidify the Evangelical vote.
Oh – by the way some people think Reagan was great
We need some very sharp elbows
define “elected”
I absolutely agree with you that we need to play to win. But we–as a party–need to play to win.
Bill won twice. But in the process, he emphasized money and teevee over grassroots and let the strength of the Democratic party wither. And that devastated him electorally in 94, and made it a lot harder on Gore in 2000. Hillary risks doing far worse with this shit.
So you may get Hillary and the expected huge number of new Dems in Congress. But then what? You’re stuck with Hillary…or someone else named Clinton.
George is in office and getting us in trouble. He should have lost by wide margins – could it be because Gore and Kerry did not know how to fight back and run a national campaign?
Possession is apparently the law today. Media does not care – they want to sell sensationalism
It’s partly because George cheated. And it’s partly because GOre didn’t have what all Democrats before him used to ensure big wins: mobilization of real people. Apparently, Hillary is happy with that condition, because that’s what this ploy will bring about.
Call me crazy. But I’d rather have someone who runs in such a way that she–and her successor–can win.
empty wheel –
So -is it Obama or Edwards
Um, none–and I’m rather amused that you resort that that presumption rather than respond to my argument on the merits.
I like aspects of all three candidates. And hate aspects of them all. I strongly believe any of the three will win, and I strongly believe any of teh three will be a very good president. I have neither given money nor time to any of the candidates. And frankly, if Hillary were to win, it would be best for me personally.
But that’s not why I think this is bullshit. I think this move is bullshit on the merits, and it’s the first time that I have been moved to really work against a candidate, because Hillary is treating me–and everyone else in MI–like a rube.
Its not really the first time. My first big taste of this was a “survey” her campaign sent me more than a year ago, wanting to know what I saw as the most important issues in the forthcoming campaign. Helpfully, she provided a list of possible issues– but the war in Iraq was not on her list, and there was no way to write in other concerns!
Her young professional life was mainly involved with working as a lawyer for big businesses like Wal-Mart, wasn’t it? Experiences like that are often formative.
Bob in HI
emptywheel –
Have you read Makeleine Albright’s new book ” Memo to the President Elect”
She provides a overview of the world problems the new president elect will see. Do you think it is a fair portrayal?
No, I haven’t. But I have had very heated debates with very high level Hillary foreign policy advisors and don’t particularly think the general political view of the campaign is particularly wise for America.
Maddy Albright knows better than most Americans how ugly the world is. But I don’t particularly think she’s got much wisdom about how to fix it.
All of which is aside from the fact that I happen to value a vibrant democracy, and lasting victory, over dirty ploys, and short-term victory.
emptywheel-
Hey – we are all entitled to our view – good luck on the theory discussed in the University – we are now in the real world.
I still like your blog
Again, you might try matching my argument on the merits rather than assuming you know anything about my political background.
In addition to heated discussions about foreign policy, I’ve also had some interesting chats with Hillary advisors about how to win elections–and that part of the conversation is where they started realizing I’ve got real world experience and some successes to speak from.
I’m waiting for your apology to emptywheel.
You’re insulting one of the great, young minds of the Democratic party with ad hominem cliche.
As she said, if you want to argue the merits, bring it on.
Otherwise, address her with the respect she has earned.
yes! thanks!
Who is running the DNC, is it Dean? How does he handle this play that feels to me like comes from a sense of entitlement?
This is what Dean and Pelosi said in October:
“The reality is if you want to know if Florida is going to be seated, ask the Democratic nominee as soon as one emerges,” Pelosi said.
Dean agreed.
“At the end of the day, the nominee will make a decision, essentially about who gets seated,” Dean agreed.
http://www.sptimes.com/2007/10…..No_h.shtml
thank you. sounds like hillary’s taking the “I’m the winner” campaign posture again. wasn’t it that positioning that made Obama’s win in Iowa such a strategy-changing event for Hillary?
Anyone heard from Dean lately?
Honestly, this is the sort of ploy that would have surprised me not a bit coming from Tom Delay in some sleazy Texas Legislature battle.
It’s of a piece with the rest of her campaigning, IMHO.
One of my friends went to CSUN (that’s Cal State Northridge, in the San Fernando Valley, for all you right-coasters) last week to see Clinton. As it was told to me, ansd somewhat abridged:
The e-mailed invitation said RSVP, event scheduled for 2-4 pm.
Friend got there at 1 pm, found that having RSVP’d got you into a line to wait for admission.
The hall was sized for about 300 people.
About 60 media folk got in, plus VIPS.
Someone came out and said that because of the small space, Clinton would spend an hour inside, then come outside to talk to the rest of the crowd.
Clinton arrived at 2:45pm.
My friend left long before it was over, because it was chilly and windy, and she’d been standing outside for two f*cking hours waiting.
She also reported that Clinton’s campaign had arranged,
via local congresscritter,
who called local city councilmember,
who called Northridge Chamber of Commerce,
for a ’round table’ with local small businesses that have taken damage due to Shrub’s policies.
Congresscritter didn’t get in.
City councilmember didn’t get in.
Chamber president apparently didn’t get in.
Small businesspeople basically lost an entire afternoon to her.
This is why we aren’t voting for Clinton in our primary: we’re seeing hunger for power, or poor campaign planning and management (possibly both), and we’ve had more than enough of that in the last seven years. We aren’t crazy about Obama, either.
The Michigan-and-Florida delegate maneuver looks like more of the same. (And the policy of permanently reserving the first spots for NH and Iowa, saying no-one else is allowed have a primary or a caucus that early, is silly. The primaries should be limited to, say, Feb through April.)
Hey EW you could be right about being kicked out of the Mi Dems. LiL Debbie won’t like this at all but so what
This is a hot one Keep up the good reads
Well, maybe not the MI Dems, but our little corner of it, I guess.
Naw it won’t even affect our little corner all the rest of our corner love to much and know how much good you have done for the party but I am having a hard time getting ready to help this year
I hear you. Maybe Mark Schauer will appreciate the kind of effort you put in…
SusanS and fiscalliberal – I, for one, am Damn Tired of the condescension and say-anything pandering of semi-Royal Politicians – that’s a proven incubator for Unitary Executives.
In speaking to Michiganders and Floridians, Hillary really sounds like she’s talking down to the Little People.
I got sick of that shit seven years ago.
No.More.
Change is what We need, imho, and Obama-Edwards is Change.
You are entitled to your opinion – see you after the convention
fiscalliberal = clinton operative
Frankly, I’m so sick of this primary shit. For the past seven months, I’ve done nothing but try to convince Florida Democrats to vote next Tuesday (I’m a district leader in Hillsborough County). We have a VERY important tax amendment on the ballot that we must defeat, and we are terrified that our voters will stay home from the polls because the media is telling them that their votes won’t count. Every single day at our local Democratic office, most of the calls are from voters asking us why their votes don’t count. We have to convince them to vote. I’m very grateful to Hillary for making this statement today, and I’m pissed off at Edwards and Obama for not doing the same.
We could have easily handled the delegate thing, but the pledge was a whole different story. That was such a slap in our faces. To see the candidates come here for high dollar fundraisers but not meet with grassroots supporters because they were being held hostage by Iowa, New Hampshire, et al, was a bitter (and unnecessary) pill to swallow. I can’t wait for this mess to be over.
SusanS – Brava to you for getting feet on the street!
Imvho, what was lost in Michigan was an opportunity to have the Dem Candidates address Labor issues – in a State that sets much of the national tone wrt Labor. We really could have learned a lot.
Similarly, Florida is one of the most healthcare/elderly-issues conscious States, and we all missed an opportunity there to better understand the needs of our parents and grandparents, as prologue for our own future care.
It’s pretty hard to say that whatever was gained by moving the primary dates was better than what we’re getting as a result.
And, we may look back on Michigan and Florida and say it was a really bad idea not to get the Dem electorate out in force in the Primaries as a warm-up for November.
EW – I’m a Florida Democrat and I 100% agree with you.
Party insiders in both Michigan and Florida tried to bigfoot the DNC knowing full well that they were in violation of the primary calendar rules (and penalties) agreed to by at the DNC Fall 2006 meeting which included delegates from FL and MI. State party insiders disenfranched their own people, denied their own states the opportunity to see candidates in person with their own idiotic reading of the rules. It wasn’t really a “reading” actually — more like a pouting and stamping of feet — the ruling was never in doubt.
Here’s the best summary of the process I’ve seen by Georg Schuttler, a young Democrat at MSU:
Substitute Florida for Michigan and Debbie Wasserman-Schutlz, Bill Nelson, Alcee Hastings, and FL Democratic chair Karen Thurman for Granholm and you have the same story. People who think they are bigger than the rules.
And for people who think this is just “hardball” — the rules that Hillary Clinton is proposing breaking are rules of the Democratic Party agreed upon by fellow Democrats under bylaws, backed by a Federal court ruling and Supreme Court precedent. National parties get to decide how delegates are awarded.
Dope Dems couldn’t wait until February 5th. Now you want delegates? You’ll get nothing and like it!
Who? The legislature? The FDP never wanted an earlier primary. Neither did the DNC members. Even though our Dem legislators voted for it (remember we also got paper ballots out of the bill), we don’t have the numbers to stop any legislation in Tallahassee. Blaming Florida Democrats for anything is a little silly.
Yes, the Hillary Clinton statement panders in the effort to win Florida voters, and keep superdelegates, for the long haul. Senator Clinton and her campaign are gambling big.
Most prospective Democratic voters are already tired of the tone that has infected the campaigns of “major” Democratic candidates, and now it appears that nastiness will run through the national convention. Republicans are taking detailed notes.
Any candidate who has been typecast as playing any side of an issue for political expediency, as Hillary Clinton has, would do well stategically to avoid confirming the suspicions of the undecided while giving ammunition to the other major political party. A self-inflicted TKO is not inconceivable.
“strategically,” that should have been.
SusanS – Thanks for your response and thanks for your hard work for Florida.
It’s false that Florida Dems got pushed into this by Florida GOP. While it’s true that the Republican Governor and Republican Legislature were driving the train Florida Dems happily jumped on board.
Here’s how the NYT recounted the FL Dems petition to the DNC to let them keep delegates.
What did that “unsuccessful fight” look like? in the FL Legislature? The Florida House voted unanimously 118-0 to move the date and the Florida Senate voted 37-2 to move the date. Yes the bill moving the election date was tied to a popular bill eliminating touch screen voting machines but it’s revisionist history to suggest that Florida Democrats were victims of the Florida GOP. It’s nice to eliminate touch screen voting but in the process FL Dems ELIMINATED MY ABILITY TO CAST A VOTE THAT COUNTS. In real time, FL Dems supported the move. It’s just false to say FL Dems were victims of circumstance. A 118-0 vote to move the primary date in the FL House should tell you something about the accuracy of Sen. Nelson and Karen Thurman.
Here’s a timeline..
May 3, 2007 – FL House votes 118-0 (including 42 Dems) to approve move to Jan. 29th
June 18, 2007 – I get email from FL Dem. party saying,
That’s pure Bigfoot politics. The FL Dems consulted with the DNC, the DNC said “Hell no. FL delegates to the DNC agreed to a calendar last year. Live with the agreement”, and FL Dems went ahead and moved the date anyway. Then with a boast FL Dems waved around their big 27 electoral votes — which are irrelevant to the discussion of electing a party nominee. You don’t use electoral votes for a nominee, you use DNC delegates. Of which, Florida now has zero — thanks to Karen Thurman, Rep. Nelson, Rep. Wasserman-Schultz, Rep. Hastings et al..
Oh yeah..
August 25, 2007: DNC does what it said it would do all along — strips Florida of it’s delegates for violating the DNC agreement. FL Dems lie and cry “…but the Republicans made us do it!”
Florida and Michigan will lose any convention fight because why on earth would any other state support the right of states to break agreements and cut in line? I support the rule of law and the rules. If Democrats can’t follow their own internal bylaws — how the hell can we fight Republicans and defend the Constitution?
I understand everything you wrote, but you are not considering all of the behind-the-scenes machinations that went into this mess. First of all, the FDP had no control over any of the players, and were forced to put a good face (and a unified Florida face) on it. The only way we–the Democrats–could have moved the Primary would have been to hold caucuses. Caucuses would have disenfranchised so many minority groups that we could not have done it. The Party did not have enough money to do any other kind of vote (and believe me, they investigated EVERY possibility).
Most of my anger is with the legislators who didn’t think this through, and who deliberately dissed Howard Dean when he warned about what would happen. Since they didn’t have the votes to oppose the primary date change, they could have voted against the bill in protest. But remember, that same bill brought us a change to the voting system (paper ballots), so voting against it would have sent another message that could have been used against our Dems in the legislature.
I’m also very upset with Bill Nelson, Alcee Hastings, et al, who kept telling Florida voters that they didn’t count. This property tax amendment is much more important than the primary vote, and if turnout is depressed because of their grandstanding, I will be even more pissed off. Fortunately, if early voting is an indication, our Democrats are turning out in droves.
Our Netroots Progressive Coalition did a radio interview with Markos during the state convention in October, and he said that the nation owes a debt of gratitude to Florida and Michigan for shaking up the primary system. He said that because of us, things will change in 2012.
SusanS
I add the thanks of others for your work getting out the vote in FL. It was easy here to blow it off, since we had absolutely nothing on our ballot. Just the Presidential (though my precinct still turned out in strong numbers; then again, my whole county defeated Hillary, bc of the universitites, no doubt).
Like you, I’m mostly blaming the party leaders who pulled this trick. But particularly for MI, where the rules AND the vote have already been set, Hillary’s grandstanding comes off as really cynical.
It comes down to this: she claims seating our delegates would be all it takes to give us a voice. And that’s an insult to MI.
In re your statement, “But particularly for MI, where the rules AND the vote have already been set, Hillary’s grandstanding comes off as really cynical.” I got my first taste of what I’d hoped was not going to be triangulation when noting that unlike Edwards and Obama, Clinton chose to leave her name on the ballot. I was not pleased that Hillary was willing to eschew the high road taken by Edwards and Obamain but in those days I was willing to suspend my disbelief and was still a nominal supporter.
As all of us here well know, her only opponents in MI were Gravel, Kucinich, Dodd and uncommitted. But counting on a less-well-informed public [and interviewers on MSNBC who hear BS with equinamity] I was horrified to note that Hilary herself [McClatchey interview] as well as supporters such as Nita Lowey [Jan 21 on MSNBC interview] are touting her “win” in Michigan. Now I realize she was just exploiting the situation from the beginning. YUCK.
Every time Hillary does something like this, it only convinces me that she is the best choice for our party. I want someone who fights to win. The GOP never plays by the rules, and if we want to beat them, we have to be just as tough.
…and the evidence that the same sharp elbows will be used on the Republicans is ?
SusanS – I don’t see how any plan could have disenfranchised more voters than the plan that the FL Democratic leaders choose — which disenfranchised every Democratic voter in Florida.
Here are a few problems I see in this chain of pure Flor-i-duh:
– FL delegates to the DNC calendar comm. did not submit FL for consideration as an early state
– FL delegates to the DNC calendar comm. voted to approve the rules for the ‘08 calendar — including sanctions
– Knowing the DNC rules, Dems in the FL state legislature put insufficient (or no) effort into moving up the primary date to Feb. 5th, not Jan. 29th. The original FL bill (HB 537 – see Florida) had a provision to move the date to the “first Tuesday in February or the first Tuesday immediately following the New Hampshire presidential preference primary, whichever occurs first.” Was it impossible to strike the “or the…” part of the bill?
– Regardless of what took place behind the scenes, FL members of the state legislature offered no on-the-record opposition to moving the primary date and in fact voted for it, unanimously in the House, overwhelmingly in the Senate
– after the bill passed in the Florida Legislature moving the primary to Jan. 29th why did FL Dems seemingly do everything they could to bad mouth the DNC and do nothing in the way of issuing a mea culpa? The DNC even offered $866,000 (from 7-15% of the cost based on Nevada caucus) to help fund a caucus that was in compliance with the rules. Instead FL Dems voted unanimously to go ahead with the Jan. 29th date. The DNC then voted all but unaimously (one dissent) to strip 100% of the delegates.
– About Markos’s statement, I’d prefer to shake up the system with my vote, not my lack of a vote
EW,
I think one of the things that puts Florida in a different position from Michigan is that our primary comes after the four early states. I’ve never been as concerned about the delegates being seated, as I was about the fact that the candidates signed the pledge and wouldn’t come here to campaign. It was very insulting that they would come for high dollar fundraisers, but not for rallies where they could meet the voters. There’s absolutely no reason they shouldn’t be able to come here now, IMHO. I appreciate Hillary throwing us a bone, and I wish the others would do the same.
joejoejoe,
The only option open to the party for a binding vote would have been caucuses. They decided that the cost of implementing them, the training involved, and the inability to make sure all minorities were represented made caucuses unfeasible. That money will be much better spent on a good statewide “vote by mail” program.
It is my understanding that the FDP didn’t apply to be an early primary state because they never wanted to be one–apparently for fundraising reasons. Once again, it was the legislature that made that decision. Yes, the Dems went along with it, and they should have protested, but they didn’t. That’s why I hold them responsible for the mess. But the reality (for those of you not familiar with the breakdown of the Florida legislature) is that we have 41 seats of 120 in the House, and 14 of 40 in the Senate. We have no ability to control anything in those circumstances, but had our delegation at least vocally expressed opposition, we might have had a leg to stand on when we appealed to the DNC Rules Committee.
As far as the Florida Democrats badmouthing the DNC, once again, you are painting with a broad brush. There were so many players with their own agendas that you must distinguish among them. The Florida DNC members are not the FDP, which is not the elected Florida legislative delegation, which is not the Florida Congressional delegation. So who do you blame?
Once again, IMHO, there was no good answer to this. Our best hope was to hold the primary and make the best of it.
You make good points. Thanks for your calm and thoughtful responses to my rants.
I’m just angry that I don’t get to see any of the candidates make campaign appearances in the state and now all of a sudden one of the candidates is saying we’ve had a fair and equal process in Florida so go ahead and seat the delegates. Floridians haven’t even seen the candidates in person at all. How is that a fair process?
There are 5 FL congressional members (Sen. Nelson, Reps. Hastings, Wasserman-Schultz, Meek, & C. Brown) who are backing Hillary Clinton and they have been some of the loudest voices in favor of the changed date and against the DNC after the FL legislature voted. Does that mean anything? I don’t know much about Karen Thurman other than what I read in the press and in emails from the FL Democratic Party but she, Sen. Nelson, and (former judge) Rep. Hastings seem not to have a clue about the well established legal precedent that national parties make their own rules as well as the recent example of Delaware in ‘96 and ‘00 holding a beauty contest primary and then awarding delegates by caucus later in the process.
As for the Florida Legislature – maybe it’s too much to expect them to have any sense of the national politics but the 118-0 vote in the House sure doesn’t help the case of the Florida Democratic Party who claim to be victims of the GOP agenda to the DNC.
I take it you don’t mind not being invited to any of Debbie Dingell’s parties any longer.
That’s okay, I suspect I won’t get as warm a welcome from Granholm next time I see her.
It’s funny how only a month ago the vast majority of folks were saying Hillary runs a Presidential-style campaign, is so expert and professional–Hillary’s Ninjas were supposed to be a mark of her prowess and her acumen. So today she’s a ambitious dope for playing hardball in only the way her Ninja Advisors know how.
Obama seems to swing from offense to defense, roll with the punches sort of like the seaweed rolls with the tide. He is listless. Then, he abruptly lashes out with a good zinger. Then he complains about having to campaign against two Clintons. And then he tag-teams with his wife in family self-defense. And somehow this is perceived alternately as clever and desperate.
Obama fooled around with the rules and technicalities. Hillary fooled around with the rules and technicalities. And the Superdelegates are laughing and meeting in their own backrooms to deal with who gets the biggest chunk of delegates in the real world barring some tidal wave change of election dynamics.
Edwards is right. The system is rigged from top to bottom. It IS broken and this H&O crap is living proof.
I am sticking with Edwards. All. The. Way.
I agree with most all of what you say. These politicians are – gasp! – being politicians. I have really come to believe that the real problem is the press. They have always covered horserace politics in presidential elections, but the shameless and constant riot inducing manner they are now doing it is beyond belief. They are not doing this because this shit is real or matters one lick; they are doing it because news is now a profit center, not a public service, and the more they get the electorate whipped into these asinine arguments, the more ratings they get. Nothing more than another dead blonde girl. Other than when our country was founded, and perhaps WWII, I am not sure if there has been another time in our history when our country was on such a precarious precipice. Yet instead of focusing on the issues we are arguing over this crap.
If only Karl Rove hadn’t stuffed the Delaware Plan in 2000, neither the Dems nor the Reps would be in this mess. (Yes, the RNC punished its crazed it’s-all-about-MEEEEE gun-jumpers, too, though you don’t hear much about that in the media.)
I’m reading this several days late (natch) but this may be the final chunk to push me against Hillary for sure for our primary. (Since we’re just after Mega-Tuesday here in Maryland, it may not matter. Still…)
In other news, you might be amused, M, that Obama just happens to be speaking downstairs from my office on Monday… at the same time I’ll be going through election judge training so that we can avoid what happened around here in the primaries two years ago, heh heh (although apparently we’ll be going back to paper/optical-scan ballots in 2010).
I’m actually in your neighborhood on Monday–though at an event on the Hill when Obama speaks.
Well, the rules….
So far, it is the DNC Credentials Commission (a sub set of the DNC) that has made the ruling regarding Florida and Michigan. Outside the window, the Convention will not seat the delegates. But this can be appealed.
After delegations from each state and territory are set, each delegation will appoint two members, one male, one female, to the Convention Committees such as rules, Platform and Credentials. You can be sure that who ever controls the delegation numerically in each state will appoint committee members favorable to their candidate. The appeal of a credentials ruling by the DNC Commission would go to the Credentials Committee of the Convention. There are about 110 members of these committees (Americans Abroad, Guam, Virgin Islands, etc., all get one member).
Hillary must anticipate that she will control (hold the majority) in at least 50% of these delegations — and she may, we certainly don’t know yet. At any rate, the Credentials Committee will issue a ruling, but if there is a viable minority (I think it is about 25% of the committee members) it can be further appealed to the floor. In which case, floor fight will transpire. The decision of the convention is final. Remember, in calculating who controls a delegation, you have to add in the Super Delegates, many of whom are not yet selected, (The State Legislators, city and county elected officials selected as Superdelegates) and many others are not yet declared.
Depending on how things come out Feb 5, it could well be a floor vote on the credentials matter could tell us how the nomination will come out.