home
Gene Lyons On The Democrats' MI/FL Problem | 160 comments (160 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Um, DUH. (5.00 / 7) (#3)
by madamab on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:27:20 PM EST
Why can't the Obamans realize what weaponry we are giving the GOP by not allowing a re-vote or the seating of the delegates?

We are NOT the party of disenfranchisement. It is NOT OKAY to ignore such a large portion of the electorate.

Hello?

Oh ok... (none / 0) (#7)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:29:17 PM EST
But Hillary can negotiate with already pledged delegates and state she's willing to play the superdelegates?  It doesn't go both ways.

[ Parent ]
Obama took Clinton delegates (5.00 / 6) (#11)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:31:06 PM EST
in Iowa and in other states we are proudly told by Obama supporters.

I detest the practice myself.

I condemned it here.

I also condemn Obama's blocking of revotes in FL and MI.

Can you condemn ANYTHING done by Obama? I am positive you are incapable of doing so.

[ Parent ]

Obama is already doing that (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by Grey on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:31:39 PM EST
In Texas.

Same standards, please.

[ Parent ]

Oh ok... (none / 0) (#22)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:38:53 PM EST
So the postcard was going to magically turn the delegate?  Sending postcards = negotiating now?  Ignoring the fact that it was stated as a mistake.

[ Parent ]
What about Obama's call to David Paterson? (5.00 / 5) (#29)
by madamab on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:43:18 PM EST
The new Governor of New York?

He's a pledged superdelegate for Hillary. Obama tried to poach him. Didn't work though.

Really, I don't understand the double standards here. The superdelegates can vote for whomever they want.

[ Parent ]

But he just called to congratulate (none / 0) (#36)
by oculus on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:47:00 PM EST
the Gov.

[ Parent ]
Um, I live in New York. (none / 0) (#56)
by madamab on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:01:11 PM EST
He tried to poach Paterson.

Paterson was Lt. Governor and thus a superdelegate prior to his elevation. He committed to Hillary a long time ago.

[ Parent ]

i know. Campaign spin. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by oculus on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:01:49 PM EST


[ Parent ]
missed the snark. :-) (5.00 / 1) (#68)
by madamab on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:07:50 PM EST
sorry, I'm new. :-p

[ Parent ]
I'm supposed to be marking it. (5.00 / 1) (#75)
by oculus on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:12:31 PM EST


[ Parent ]
Oh ok... (none / 0) (#40)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:49:02 PM EST
Patterson was already a superdelegate before he became governor, he wasn't accorded superdelegate status because he's the governor of NY.

[ Parent ]
Not quite (none / 0) (#37)
by Grey on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:47:17 PM EST
No.  It equals that both camps are doing it.

[ Parent ]
Ahem (none / 0) (#59)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:04:23 PM EST
One camp has stated they will do it without regard to the popular vote.

[ Parent ]
what does that mean? (5.00 / 1) (#140)
by wasabi on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:58:19 PM EST
"without regard to the popular vote"

Poaching someone's delegate (other than the superdelegates) cannot be done w/o regard to the popular vote, since that is roughly how delegates are determined.

[ Parent ]

Right, (none / 0) (#156)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 04:28:04 PM EST
because sending a postcard = poaching.

[ Parent ]
Oh, OK... (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by madamab on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:34:35 PM EST
that has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue at hand, which is whether or not Michigan and Florida's votes should be counted. We cannot disenfranchise them and still call ourselves Democrats.

The superdelegates are going to decide no matter what we do and no matter which candidate wins. Obama cannot win enough delegates to get to the magic number either.

[ Parent ]

Obviously, the point is... (none / 0) (#21)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:37:09 PM EST
You can't harp on "disenfranchisement" if your willing to have the leader in the popular vote lose because of a handful of superdelegates.

[ Parent ]
How is Obama the leader in popular vote? (5.00 / 5) (#24)
by madamab on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:40:34 PM EST
Why, by not counting Michigan and Florida, of course!

The primaries are far from over. Big states have yet to weigh in.

And once again, you miss the point. The point is that we are discounting the votes of Michigan and Florida. Not. OKAY.

[ Parent ]

Seriously... (none / 0) (#28)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:42:36 PM EST
Just curious, what was the turnout like in Florida and Michigan?

[ Parent ]
Florida (5.00 / 2) (#34)
by Step Beyond on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:46:51 PM EST
I don't know Michigan but I can give you Florida turnout:

Florida Dem turnout: 42.30%
Average Dem turnout in closed primary states: 40.74%
Median Dem turnout in closed primary states: 41.75%

[ Parent ]

Michigan (5.00 / 1) (#122)
by cmugirl on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:38:25 PM EST
594,398 people voted in the Democratic primary.

HRC received 328,309
Obama removed his name voluntarily and did not receive votes, but "Uncommitted" received 238,186

In Florida, 1,749,920 people voted in the Democratic primary.

HRC received 870,986
BO received 576,214

[ Parent ]

The reason it (5.00 / 2) (#85)
by Warren Terrer on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:17:05 PM EST
wasn't a huge issue back then was the candidates were hoping that a clear winner would have emerged, rendering the issue moot. Come on, you know this.

[ Parent ]
So Hillary's not allowed to change (5.00 / 1) (#134)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:48:39 PM EST
her position based on the facts on the ground?

We all criticized GW Bush for not changing HIS positions based on the realities of life.  

True leaders change their positions based on the changing facts.   Nobody knew the race would be so close.  Now that it is, the races in Florida and MI need to be accounted in order to know who really won.

Are you against recounting votes in close general elections, too?  Should the candidates in close elections state ahead of time that they won't recount votes, then be disallowed from changing their mind if the election is too close to call? I've learned in non-close races the vote counts are rather sloppy.  However in close races, the counts have to be more precise.  Fl/MI is completely analogous to that.


[ Parent ]

Who's we? (none / 0) (#23)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:40:14 PM EST
You attribute positions to people without at all making any attempt to evidence such position.

[ Parent ]
oh ok (none / 0) (#27)
by Aye B2 on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 02:41:22 PM EST
you're*

[ Parent ]
A lot of people were screaming very loudly... (none / 0) (#78)
by madamab on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:13:53 PM EST
and many of them were from Florida and Michigan.

They are going to be very, very angry if something isn't done.

[ Parent ]

Utter and total hogwash (none / 0) (#129)
by Trickster on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:43:17 PM EST
Try using citations and links and you'll get closer to stating what actually happened.

[ Parent ]
Clinton is not negotiating with pledged delegates (5.00 / 1) (#127)
by Trickster on Thu Mar 27, 2008 at 03:40:41 PM EST
I know she made recent comments to the effect that "pledged" delegates are not actually pledged.

This was a statement of fact.  She has never said she intends to lobby pledged delegates to break their pledges.  However, thanks to the avalanche of calls for her to drop out, she has been obliged to drop hints here and there as to the numerous ways by which things may not go as planned for Obama.  

I think the "pledged" delegates statement was one of her more awkward ways of making that point, but I do agree that making that point in a number of ways has been necessitated by the Obama camp's withdrawal-pressure tactic.

[ Parent ]

Gene Lyons On The Democrats' MI/FL Problem | 160 comments (160 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft