TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- so about those delegates that couldn't participate
so about those delegates that couldn't participate
| quote: |
| Democrats Try to End Impasse Over Delegates By JOHN M. BRODER WASHINGTON � With the two Democratic presidential candidates in near-deadlock and battling for every delegate, party leaders and the rival campaigns started searching in earnest on Thursday for a way to seat barred delegations from Florida and Michigan. But they remained deeply divided over how to do so. After weeks in which the issue hovered in the background, it shot to the forefront of the Democratic race as it became apparent that the delegates at stake could be vital in influencing whether Senator Barack Obama or Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the nomination. Mrs. Clinton won the most votes in primaries in Florida and Michigan in January. But the states held their contests earlier than allowed by the Democratic National Committee�s rules, leading the party to strip them of their delegates to the nominating convention. Neither candidate campaigned actively in the two states, and Mr. Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan. Mr. Obama has maintained a slim but steady lead over Mrs. Clinton in delegates awarded by voting in the primaries and caucuses of other states. The Clinton campaign is hoping she can translate her advantage in the popular vote in Florida and Michigan into a big share of their combined 367 delegates. The fate of those disputed delegates has emerged as a battle between the candidates that could be as important as their next big primary contest, in Pennsylvania next month. But though the states, the party and the candidates have all suggested that they have no choice but to find a solution and that they are open to another round of voting, much remains to be settled. Among the issues are what kind of contests to hold, when to hold them, how to allocate the delegates and, critically, who picks up the multimillion-dollar tab in each state. �I�ll leave it up to the Democratic National Committee to make a decision about how to resolve it,� Mr. Obama told ABC News on Thursday night. �But I certainly want to make sure that we�ve got Michigan and Florida delegates at the convention in some fashion.� The campaigns are not negotiating with each other, but are talking through surrogates and party leaders about a variety of options. Aides to Mrs. Clinton, brimming with confidence after primary victories in Ohio and Texas this week, signaled that they were open to a revote under certain conditions. Aides to Mr. Obama were warier, sensing that the recent change in the electoral and psychological dynamic could work against him in any new election in those two states, Democrats said. In the contests in January, Mrs. Clinton prevailed in Florida by 50 percent to 33 percent over Mr. Obama. In Michigan, where Mr. Obama�s name was not on the ballot, Mrs. Clinton took 55 percent of the vote while �uncommitted� won 40 percent. �We haven�t ruled out rerunning these contests,� said Harold Ickes, a top adviser to Mrs. Clinton and her chief delegate hunter. �We�ve said we think it should be settled. We believe some configuration could be devised that each party is not happy with but each party is willing to accept.� In a sign of growing involvement by party leaders, Speaker Nancy Pelosi met privately Thursday with Mr. Ickes and Maggie Williams, Mrs. Clinton�s campaign manager, and discussed, among other topics, the Florida and Michigan primary problem, the tone of the campaign and the role of superdelegates. At an earlier news conference, Ms. Pelosi said that the Florida-Michigan issue was a matter of party rules but that she hoped a solution could be found before the party�s convention. David Plouffe, Mr. Obama�s campaign manager, floated the idea of allocating the delegates from the two states 50-50, which would erase Mrs. Clinton�s hypothetical advantage and essentially make the two states meaningless in the competitive delegate count. It would, however, allow Michigan and Florida delegates to participate in the national convention. Even if Florida and Michigan conduct new elections, it is unlikely that either candidate will have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination outright, advisers to both campaigns say. But their relative strength in pledged delegates could affect their ability to attract support from superdelegates, the elected officials and party leaders whose choices are likely to determine the outcome. If the results of the two primaries are allowed to stand and Mr. Obama is awarded the delegates won by �uncommitted� on the Michigan ballot, Mrs. Clinton would pick up 64 delegates toward the 2,209 that would be needed to secure the nomination if the full Florida and Michigan delegations were seated, according to calculations by her campaign. Mr. Plouffe said he believed Mrs. Clinton�s net advantage would be slightly smaller. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic Party, said on Thursday that it was up to the states, not the national party, to come up with a solution. But Mr. Dean ruled out seating the delegations based on the voting in January. �You can�t change the rule in the middle of the game,� he said in an interview on NBC�s �Today� program. Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm of Michigan, a Democrat, and Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida, a Republican, have jointly called on the national party to resolve the situation. Aides to both said on Thursday that they were seeking a solution that did not require either state to pay for new elections. Ms. Granholm, a Clinton supporter, said Thursday that there would be a noisy protest at the Democratic convention if the Michigan delegation was not seated. But she left open the possibility of a new Democratic primary, as long as the taxpayers or the state party do not have to foot the bill. �If there is a redo, it has to be inclusive,� she said. �Whatever it is would have to be a primary-like election.� Florida officials said rerunning a statewide primary could cost as much as $18 million, which some state officials consider prohibitive. �A revote is not going to happen,� said Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, a supporter of Mrs. Clinton. Michigan officials did not estimate the cost of a new election, but party leaders involved in negotiating a solution said that a full statewide election, as opposed to a caucus, could cost as much as $10 million. A group of Michigan Democratic party elders have been meeting quietly for weeks seeking a solution to the deadlock. The members, all of them officially neutral in the primary, include Senator Carl Levin; Representative Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick; Ron Gettelfinger, the head of the United Auto Workers; and Debbie Dingell, a top General Motors executive, Democratic National Committee member and the wife of Representative John D. Dingell. �However it gets resolved,� Ms. Dingell said. �it must be a consensus involving all parties, result in the entire delegation being seated, be supported by both candidates and the D.N.C. and be practical and affordable. �There is also strong consensus that Michigan undertook this because we believe the current system is broken and we believe there must be real and fundamental change in the process and it must be addressed.� In Florida, Senator Bill Nelson, a Democrat who supports Mrs. Clinton, and the state party chairwoman, Karen Thurman, who is neutral, said the national party or some other source should pay for any do-over. Both insisted that Florida�s delegates must be seated, even if that meant allocating the delegates according to the Jan. 29 results. �If we don�t do anything, we�re looking at a train wreck,� Mr. Nelson said. �I�m hoping reasonable heads with prevail and will see the Democratic Party doesn�t want to be at the convention in Denver two months out from the general election and having a major intraparty fight with two of the biggest and most important states in electing the next president.� http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/u...=rssnyt&emc=rss |
I swear... the electoral process down there is probably the most confusing thing ever
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Swamper I swear... the electoral process down there is probably the most confusing thing ever |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Swamper I swear... the electoral process down there is probably the most confusing thing ever |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 People, primaries are simply each party choosing its candidate. This is not the actual election. Most of the rules for the primaries are made by the political parties. States fill in the gaps with election laws of their own. However, this is not something that is US federal law. |
It appears that the delegates from Florida and Michigan will only be seated provided they pay for a new primary in June - which is fine by me. As stated in the Obama thread in the Chill Out Room, this really allows the Democratic Party a chance to do some real infrastructure development in states that will be battlegrounds in November.
They're also fairly irrelevant at this point as well - I believe the Primary has been sewn up, and it's mathematically impossible for the Clinton campaign to do any serious catching up.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo this particular election cycle, as crazy as it is, makes me proud to be an American not only for the diversity but b/c it can only happen here. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by josh4 yes i agree America is probably one of the only places where the president is chosen by the supreme court. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo whatever josh4. that could happen in any democratic country that has an independent judiciary. pick one. |
the delegates should not be seated. there should be no re-vote or re-caucus or whatever. life's a bitch and they ought to learn how to deal with it.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Spacey Orange the delegates should not be seated. there should be no re-vote or re-caucus or whatever. life's a bitch and they ought to learn how to deal with it. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo sorry man had to do it. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 What's interesting is how the wingnutters cried "FOUL!" every time a reference or parallel was made to Bush and Hitler's fascism (which I personally opposed, don't get me wrong), but here comes along everyone's favorite mama's boy chickenhawk Jonah making the exact same reference of fascists to us silly libruls. Then again, IOKIYAR (It's OK If You're a Republican), so nevermind. As a sidenote, I really thought we were more like Communists, while the neocons/conservatives were more like Fascists. So now we've cornered both extremes? Make up your mind, little Jonah. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo so refusing to seat delegates or even refusing a recount is somehow not fascist? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Both states knew the rules, and both refused to abide by them. Granted, the Democratic delegates down in Florida were more or less forced by the Republican committees who moved it forward, but Michigan has no excuse. If they refuse to play by the rules, why would anyone give them exception now? Furthermore, Hillary also agreed with those rules, then had the fucking audacity to sit on her little perch and claim victory in both, DESPITE knowing neither one counted and despite Obama's name not even being on the ballot in Michigan. Besides, both campaigns are looking for a compromise re-vote in both states anyway in the coming months, so the point is likely moot regardless. Even if Hillary wins both (probably wouldn't win Michigan, but just for the sake of argument), on projection alone she still wouldn't be able to catch Obama in delegate count. So while little Jonah's book is cute and rather hypocritical, I don't see how your point of calling us silly libruls fascists works here. Added in Edit: Truth be told, I think there's some definite dirty tactics going on here in Hillary's camp, but that hardly calls for a name of "fascist" in any manner. I think the word was disgusting for certain liberal commentators to use against Bush in the past despite some of his egregious actions (and seeing the wingnut outrage as a consequence), and I find it equally disgusting for a wingnut to imply it in the same fashion against any liberal, even Hillary. It's patently absurd and over the top. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo listen, i really don't disagree with anything you said. rules are rules, but what about the voters Opus? can there be a compromise that both candidates can agree on so, at the very least, not disenfranchise party votes and voters that are just merely at the mercy of said rules? |
| quote: |
it's a great book though, and it's not on the NYT bestseller list all this time for nothing |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo listen, i really don't disagree with anything you said. rules are rules, but what about the voters Opus? can there be a compromise that both candidates can agree on so, at the very least, not disenfranchise party votes and voters that are just merely at the mercy of said rules? |
| quote: |
| anyways my more or less lighthearted Liberal Fascism post was in response Spacy Orange's knuckle-headed suggestion that lifes a bitch. i really wasn't referencing anything about the substance of the book or Hillary. |
| quote: |
| it's a great book though, and it's not on the NYT bestseller list all this time for nothing |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Yes, I know. Anything that fills the belief system of a particular group of people will sell, including books like Michael Moore, Al Franken, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, etc. etc. What else is new? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov The voters weren't at the mercy of rules, they were at the mercy of the officials that decided to circumvent those rules. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo ok, point taken still don't see that, as a voter, i wouldn't be feeling a little jipped by the system or the ego's within the system without some sort of compromise. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo what is writing nonfiction if it's not to fullfill a particular belief system? |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.