home
Greta Interviews Hillary | 161 comments (161 topical)
Sorry (5.00 / 3) (#13)
by americanincanada on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:36:37 PM EST
Obama chose to remove his name. He did not have to, there was no requirement. He wanted it this way and now he can deal with it. there will be no 50/50 split in delegates. His best bet would be to get behind a revote and fast.

As a Florida voter I think Florida has a good case given their republican leadership did what they did,  can almost bet Florida gets seated as is.

[ Parent ]

The MI Legislature is out of session; (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by riddlerandy on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:42:29 PM EST
there will be no revote.  There will be a 50/50 split, or they will not be seated for nomination purposes.  For the Dems, the former is far superior, and that is what will happen.  But if you want to continue to believe that some miracle will change that, more power to you.

[ Parent ]
To be clear (5.00 / 1) (#29)
by flyerhawk on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:55:56 PM EST
No matter what Michigan or Florida did they would still need to get a approval vote from the credentials committee.   If they had a re-vote that would still need approval from the Committee.  This is the reason why both candidates had to sign off on the re-vote otherwise they could potentially scuttle in August which would have been very ugly.

I doubt the delegates will be 50/50.  They will be 100/0 in favor of whomever is already the presumptive nominee going into the Convention.

[ Parent ]

I think you don't know (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:59:48 PM EST
Michiganders, especially Yoopers, and how angry they are.  Tip: Steer clear of the UP with that talk. :-)

[ Parent ]
They very well may be (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by flyerhawk on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:19:59 PM EST
incensed by all this.  But the truth is that they have no one to blame but themselves.  The Michigan legislature didn't act in a vacuum.  They moved the date up because it was a politically popular thing to do.

I don't feel a great deal of pity for them.   My state moved up it's primary this year.  But they follow the rules as set forth by the DNC.  Thus, for the first time in decades, NJ voters had a say in the nomination process.  

Why should Michigan and/or Florida get GREATER influence on the nomination for violating the rules?

And, as I said, this ignores the fact that procedurally there really is no way for their votes to matter in a meaningful way.  Either Obama will retain his lead, which case he will control the Convention floor or Hillary will wipe out that lead and, with the aid of the SDs, she will have control of the floor and win the nomination regardless of Fl and Mi.

At this point the entire FL and MI issue is moot.  Nothing can be done about it until August.  It is no longer a factor in the primary elections.

[ Parent ]

Oh, I think you're very wrong that (5.00 / 1) (#51)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:21:54 PM EST
nothing can be done about this until August.

But let's leave it at that, to save you saying the same things yet again.  We'll both wait and see.

[ Parent ]

Well the easiest way (5.00 / 1) (#59)
by flyerhawk on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:34:52 PM EST
to prove how wrong I am is to explain HOW I am wrong.

What is the mechanism that seats the MI and FL delegates before the convention without the approval of both candidates?  

[ Parent ]

So many ways . . . (none / 0) (#68)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:41:18 PM EST
DNC changes decision again, based on needing funds for the Denver convention -- see story today on big donors/Clinton backers coming down on Dean, et al. -- and/or super-delegates commit in sufficient numbers, and/or Harry Reid does whatever he says will be done to resolve this in backrooms by then, etc.

[ Parent ]
It can't do that (5.00 / 1) (#79)
by flyerhawk on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 12:01:43 AM EST
the DNC can't change their minds.  Here are the rules

Section 20 Part D

Unresolved Challenges and Report to the Credentials Committee. The DNC Rules and Bylaws
Committee shall report its activities, together with all challenges and complaints, to the
Credentials Committee of the Democratic National Convention. In cases involving unresolved
challenges which are appealed to the Credentials Committee, the burden of proof shall rest with
the party presenting the challenge.

There is no mechanism for the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, the guys who issued the punishment, to reverse it. So unless you are suggesting that the DNC will flagrantly ignore their own rules and simply decree that the state delegations be seated, there is no way it can be done.

The possibility of that happening is vanishingly small.  And if they were to try they would get sued in about 5 seconds.  

[ Parent ]

A total disregard (none / 0) (#61)
by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:35:42 PM EST

Even if Michaganers agreed it was their own fault, and not all of them are going to agree on that, they're still going to believe the punishment -- not counting in the most historic Democratic Primary of our lives -- did not fit the crime.

[ Parent ]
That may be so (5.00 / 1) (#66)
by flyerhawk on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:39:29 PM EST
But there isn't much that can be done about it at this point.  The die has been cast.  

[ Parent ]
Actually they do have (none / 0) (#80)
by hookfan on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 12:04:00 AM EST
Obama's obstructionism is an easy target,no?

[ Parent ]
you are forgetting the (5.00 / 1) (#74)
by Jeralyn on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:51:30 PM EST
rules and bylaws committee which may decide the matter first and they have a lot of leeway. They are meeting in April.

[ Parent ]
I don't see (5.00 / 2) (#84)
by flyerhawk on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 12:12:27 AM EST
anything in the rules that allows for the Rules and Bylaws to hear any appeal at this time.  

Section 20.C.1.A states that violation of timing incurs a 50% penalty. Section 20.C.5 states that the Rules and Bylaws Committee may impose harsher penalties if it so chooses.

The Committee may certify, certify non-compliance, or require corrective action to be made to be certified.  

There is no mechanism in the document for recertification after the delegates have been selected other than an appeal to the Credentials Committee.  I linked to the relevant portion of the rules in a response to CC upthread.

[ Parent ]

No 50/50 split (none / 0) (#18)
by RalphB on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:45:54 PM EST
except in your fevered dreams.  By the way, your clairvoyance is not impressive.


[ Parent ]
No fevered dreams, just hard cold logic (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by riddlerandy on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:01:34 PM EST
As for clairvoyance, you have me confused with Nancy Reagan

[ Parent ]
why is a 50/50 split far superior? n/t (none / 0) (#20)
by nycstray on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:48:25 PM EST


[ Parent ]
Because nothing else will work (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by riddlerandy on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:53:13 PM EST
And it will make it easier to seat FL as is

[ Parent ]
Both MI and FL (5.00 / 3) (#81)
by TheRefugee on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 12:05:10 AM EST
have said that their election laws do not allow for such a split.  That is why the DUMB 50/50 option suggested by Obama surrogates was immediately dismissed as a viable option by both states.

As to fair?  50/50 is fair?  50/50 is speaking for the voting populace of a state?  If nothing else will work, if nothing else is fair then I this country should stop claiming to be a democracy.

[ Parent ]

But it's not the will of the people (none / 0) (#31)
by nycstray on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:56:34 PM EST
or has that line been dropped now?

Of course, if the delegates get to vote, they at least aren't bound, so they may feel free to flip their vote . . .

[ Parent ]

The will of the people argument (none / 0) (#32)
by riddlerandy on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:59:43 PM EST
is a lot harder to make in MI, Hillary vs. a Dem to be named later?

[ Parent ]
Not to mention (5.00 / 1) (#52)
by proseandpromise on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 11:23:27 PM EST
all the people who thought the DNC meant what it said and said what it meant, so they crossed over and voted (however, whether operation chaos style or honestly, in the GOP) who would not vote now.  No doubt, that would be a majority non-Clinton voters, since other major candidates were not listed.  This puts Obama at a re-vote disadvantage from the beginning.  The only honest thing to do is to stick with the August decision.  It was a dumb decision back then, but over turning it now is just not fair.

[ Parent ]

Greta Interviews Hillary | 161 comments (161 topical)

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft