What The DNC FL Fiasco Can Cost Us: FL In The GE

By Big Tent Democrat

Thanks Howard. Thanks Donna. Way to go:

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in Florida shows John McCain holding a six-percentage point lead over Hillary Clinton and an even larger lead—sixteen percentage points—over Barack Obama. It’s McCain 49% Clinton 43% and McCain 53% Obama 37%.

The DNC is an incompetent organization looking to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Update (TL): Comments almost to 200, this thread is closing. Thanks for your thoughts.

< Hillary : Wausau Today, Madison Tonight | Barack Obama - Deval Patrick Thread II >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    My suggestion (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:15:51 PM EST
    Bite the bullet and schedule a primary for MI and FL on April 22nd, to coincide with Pennsylvania. Let the DNC pay for it.

    I'm Not Sure They Can (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by BDB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:23:03 PM EST
    I think the primaries in Michigan and Florida are state-run (state voting equipment, etc.), I don't think the DNC can just decide to hold primaries there and pay for it, unless the DNC is also going to provide (e.g. pay for) its own equipment, its own monitors, and its own polling places.  

    Well this could be Hillary's trump card (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:24:56 PM EST
    "nominate me or we lose Florida."

    And Michigan ;-) (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by BDB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:25:49 PM EST
    Just fix it already (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:27:42 PM EST
    damn it.

    Fix the mess you made Donna Brazile and Howard Dean.


    How is this on Donna Brazille and Howard Dean? (none / 0) (#207)
    by inkognegro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 11:20:54 PM EST
    Of course John McCain is up 16 on Barack Obama.  He has never campaigned there.

    and how meaningful is a 16 point lead 10 months out?  

    This isn't new.  

    Florida new the consequences and proceeded anyway.  Where was all this hue and cry back in September?


    FL will be (none / 0) (#18)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:26:52 PM EST
    seated in the end.

    Yeah. And this poll is taken when Obama (none / 0) (#19)
    by Teresa on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:27:31 PM EST
    is absolutely riding a high right now. Just wait until the attacks come and he will be creamed in Florida. HC might too, but at least she's fighting for them.

    well... (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:17:35 PM EST
    I guess I've got my answer to my earlier question: "Could we possibly be more stupid...?"

    Sure We Could (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by BDB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:28:32 PM EST
    Donna Brazile could be running one of the campaigns or, worse, she could be running a campaign with Bob Shrum.

    See?  It can always get worse.


    Ugh, I just threw up in my mouth a little (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:49:59 PM EST
    picturing that  :-)

    I know I don't contribute much to the discourse (none / 0) (#137)
    by blogtopus on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:28:13 PM EST
    But I love that line, RalphB

    An old line but sometimes it (none / 0) (#141)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:31:21 PM EST
    just fits the situation perfectly.  :-)

    Shouldn't there be an acronym? (none / 0) (#200)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 10:19:03 PM EST
    obvioulsy no we couldn't be more stupid (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:32:53 PM EST
    at this point, I wonder if seating the delegates will matter for Obama in Florida?  I wouldn't be surprised if Florida voters are so mad they won't vote for him anyway.  Fighting it has likely killed any chance he would have had there.

    He better campaign really hard in Idaho, Utah, and the rest of those lovely bright red states if he's the nominee.  :-)


    From the right (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:18:37 PM EST
    Five follies of Obama to watch for in the general election -- a preview of coming attacks.

    Here's another: (none / 0) (#202)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 10:25:07 PM EST
    wow! (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Turkana on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:20:48 PM EST
    so, hillary's support for seating the delegates (however politically motivated) is worth roughly ten points. wow!

    Completely Predictable (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by BDB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:21:03 PM EST
    This result was completely predictable.  It sets up for Floridians to be angry with Democrats generally and to be angry with Obama in particular (since he lost Florida, he naturally is going to fight against seating the delegates, thus angering Floridians even more).

    One of the things I agree with Chris Bowers (at least I think it was him) on is that if the Democratic nominee loses in November, the entire leadership of the party should step down because in addition to being a failure by the candidate, it would be a failure by the party.  This is a prime example of that.

    OTOH, Turkana at The Leftcoaster has a timely reminder of just how ridiculous it is to take any GE match ups seriously so far out from the election, BREAKING!!! Dukakis surges to huge lead!!!, reminding one and all that Michael Dukakis had a 55-38 lead over Bush in July 1988 and how much changed in four months, less than half the time we have remaining.

    Excuse me (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:23:38 PM EST
    The WHY of this is apparent to anyone with a brain.

    I have been in Florida a lot lately and the anger about this delegate thing is palpable.


    Totally (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by BDB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:34:08 PM EST
    And after the disaster that was the Kerry campaign, I kind of regretted having not been more enthused about Howard Dean.   I think I can honestly say - I'm over it.

    This has to be fixed and soon (none / 0) (#87)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:58:31 PM EST
    My Florida friends and family feel that their votes have been discounted and they are no longer part of the election process as I believe any of you who have voted in other states would feel. And I have heard two strong Democrats say to me that if their vote is not counted in the primary, then they just might avoid the GE. They are on the borderline waiting to see what the DNC will do.

    Well, that's an important swing state and (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Teresa on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:22:04 PM EST
    Obama looks really bad. I guess if they did have a new election, HC would still win.

    I have given up and accepted that Obama will win the primary, but if I had to bet, I'd bet on McCain in the general. Conservative Democrats like here in TN, will choose experience. I doubt we can take TN either way, but I think moderate to conservative Democrats everywhere will not be as enthused about Obama in November as they are now.

    so one poll in FL (none / 0) (#22)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:28:29 PM EST
    is better than all the national polls with Obama winning?

    You can't eat a national poll (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:29:36 PM EST
    This is a state poll and a very important one. (none / 0) (#27)
    by Teresa on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:29:44 PM EST
    National polls don't matter.

    Whistling past he graveyard (none / 0) (#31)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:31:14 PM EST
    Obama has to bite the bullet on this. for the good of the Party. He has to do a deal on Florida delegates.

    But Remember... (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Alvord on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:49:02 PM EST
    ...Obama is going to win South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Lousiana, Nebraska, Idaho and Alaska in the general election.

    Right? Right?


    Forgot Utah :-) (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:55:24 PM EST
    Yes, ... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Alvord on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:59:27 PM EST
    ...how could I forget Utah. Another sure state Obama will put in the Democratic column.

    You forgot Utah (none / 0) (#84)
    by Democratic Cat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:57:55 PM EST
    is that like (none / 0) (#151)
    by blogtopus on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:39:29 PM EST
    You forgot Poland? :-)

    No, but if we are using current (none / 0) (#94)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:03:27 PM EST
    polling as a guide, Obama would win Colorado...and he has a good chance in Virigina and Missouri....

    Gore's states + Colorado (or Missouri or Virginia) = Democratic win.


    Gore's states (none / 0) (#117)
    by Dan the Man on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:16:21 PM EST
    don't include New Hampshire which means you would lose if you just added Colorado.  You have to win a Southern border state like Missouri or Virginia if you just have Gore's states.

    Okay, Gore's states + NH & Colorado = win (none / 0) (#154)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:43:42 PM EST
    I am assuming NH is pretty blue....

    But there are a number of redstates that Obama does well in....and could carry in November...


    Obama dropping out from the lead (none / 0) (#56)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:42:53 PM EST
    is not good for the party.

    Losing the GE (none / 0) (#61)
    by PlayInPeoria on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:45:34 PM EST
    Is not good for the party!!

    WTF? (none / 0) (#78)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:55:13 PM EST
    Who said drop out? Are you nuts?

    the new hoop seems to be (none / 0) (#156)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:45:19 PM EST
    However wins FL in this one poll should be the nom.

    the question is will or would obama (none / 0) (#196)
    by hellothere on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:46:15 PM EST
    bite the bullet for the good of the party? i have doubts.

    Where's Kid Oakland to explain about (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:22:06 PM EST
    local party building:

    However, the poll contains hints that suggest the controversy over Florida's convention delegates may be hurting Obama. Most notably, just 55% of Sunshine State Democrats say they would vote for Obama over McCain. Thirty-one percent (31%) say they would vote for McCain. These results are especially striking given that Obama leads McCain among unaffiliated voters in the state.

    Florida was stripped of its seats at the Democratic National Convention as a penalty for holding its Primary before February 5. The candidates did not campaign in the state and Hillary Clinton handily won the popular vote. Now, Clinton is calling for the Florida delegates to be seated while Obama disagrees.

    The survey also shows that McCain leads Obama by twenty-six points among women. Women are Hillary Clinton's strongest demographic. McCain leads Obama by twenty-five points among Senior Citizens, another demographic group that is generally supportive of Clinton.

    Damn (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:23:53 PM EST
    That's unacceptable.

    No one believes me (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:26:22 PM EST
    I've been telling folks for weeks now that people are PISSED about this delegate thing here in Florida.

    No one wants to believe it.


    I believe it. (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:36:00 PM EST
    It's absurd to think this won't kill us in the fall...any fool should be able to see that.

    Seat Florida.

    Run a primary in Michigan.


    I said this the other day (none / 0) (#153)
    by hairspray on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:41:23 PM EST
    Seat Florida and hold a primary in Michigan.  The Obama people will have a fit, but a deal with Hillary for 4 years and Obama as VP to take over in 2012 will work.  A few people will have to swallow hard, but it would pull out chestnuts out of the fire IMHO.

    So, crown Hillary? (none / 0) (#158)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:48:32 PM EST
    & deal with it--that's you answer.....

    You will lose the African American vote & a lot of independents over that....

    Easy for you to say:  Just let us win & deal with it....That's uhmm fair?

    I'm outta here if Hillary wins any way other than having a lead in pledged delegates (not including Fl and Mich.) And I won't be alone...


    We will not lose the aa vote (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:56:48 PM EST
    if Obama takes the VP because in order for this to happen, he will have to put a public face on his acceptance that sends the message that this is fair.

    I think folks tend to forget that the blogosphere represents maybe 10% (at most) of the party.  Most people use the net for kitten war and porn (or both) and do not get become embroiled in the heady, heated machinations that go on here.  

    Many aa's feel as if two of their close friends are fighting, and they would be happy to see a peaceful resolution so they can all go to the movies together again.

    And if you don't vote for the dem nominee in November, then I hope McCain drafts you for his 100 year war.  You can reflect on your good choices while  you pick sand out of your hiney.


    You underestimate (none / 0) (#176)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:11:56 PM EST
    the hurt the African American community feels over Bill's comments in South Carolina...Yes, I know, many Democrats take for granted their most loyal voters....

    I am not a loyal Democrat...I am an Independent...and vote for Republicans when the Democrat is corrupt, and have done so recently....My views are most like Lincoln Chafee (who voted against the Iraq war.)   So, yes, you can toss me off, but there are millions like me....

    And Hillary is a hawk....Please, she will ask for a plan that will begin a withdrawal.  And her Iraq vote....


    you underestimate (none / 0) (#177)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:13:38 PM EST
    Obama as VP's ability to change and unite.

    You think Hillary can make him take it? (none / 0) (#198)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:56:00 PM EST
    To be third banana behind Bill?  I have heard the idea is for Obama to run for governor of Illinois....

    BTD, send your legal thoughts to someone (none / 0) (#30)
    by Teresa on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:31:03 PM EST
    who can fix this.

    they know what to do (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:32:30 PM EST
    Will Dean and Brazile continue this sham?

    they have no choice (none / 0) (#67)
    by white n az on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:48:40 PM EST
    they cannot possibly deal with the underlying issue...

    • 1.7 million dems voted in the primary in FL
    • if they seat these delegates, Obama supporters claim foul by Hillary.
    • if they don't seat those delegates, there's disenfranchisement.

    To rail about it isn't good enough...you have to offer a solution and unfortunately, there isn't one.

    I ahve the solution and offered it (none / 0) (#76)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:54:34 PM EST
    No, the problem is no one wants it, not the DNC, not Obama, not Clinton.

    All of them are being criminally stupid right now.


    don't expect Hillary to get enthusiastic (none / 0) (#90)
    by white n az on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:00:10 PM EST
    about any idea that tosses away the votes that people actually went to the polls to cast. That would be political suicide - and to do so to satisfy BTD's sense of fairness might not seem to be a good idea to her.

    So Obama (none / 0) (#80)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:55:30 PM EST
    has to come out in favor of seating the delegates....if he's as big a man as he pretends to be.

    That is the answer.  If he's such a great leader, he needs to LEAD.  He needs to do what's right because it' RIGHT, because doing the right thing is in his best interests in the long run....

    This general election "transcends Obama".


    Wait a minute (none / 0) (#150)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:36:11 PM EST
    They had an election there. Democrats voted there for all the candidates. How can one say don't seat them because I lost? Both were on the ballot. If Hillary had lost I would say the same. Just seat them. This needs to be resolved now.

    As for Michigan, maybe that was just a big political  mistake learned by Obama and Edwards. They choose to remove their names. The operative word is "Choose". Now, they should just say Do Overs and the one candidate wants all the uncommitted votes and delegates?


    Don't leave Nancy Pelosi... (none / 0) (#71)
    by Alvord on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:50:23 PM EST
    ...off of your list. She wants to exclude Florida too.

    I think they seat FL (none / 0) (#96)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:04:07 PM EST
    and they should. But if that is the case how will they enforce dates in the future? If there is no penalty for breaking the rules.

    Not asking to make an arguement against seating, but really want to know.


    How does it look that they did nothing (4.00 / 1) (#116)
    by rebecca on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:15:38 PM EST
    to 3 states out of the 5 that broke the rules while over punishing FL and MI.  FL in particular, the Democrats there did all they could to stop the legislature from bumping past the Feb 5 date.  Why should we be punishing one state for the sins of the Republicans?  The sad part is that this bungle by the DNC may end up costing us the election.

    You're right of course (none / 0) (#143)
    by blogtopus on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:32:13 PM EST
    But they didn't punish the other states that broke the rules, so this wouldn't be that big of a step back.

    rules rules rules we need 'em.


    On January 27th before Super Tuesday (none / 0) (#130)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:24:33 PM EST
    I never write diaries but maybe once a year. On Jan 27th I wrote a DK diary titled "If I lived in Florida, I would be pissed." Some did not want to hear anything about Florida but others agreed that the primary season needs to be revamped in a more fair and balanced playing field. I had a BB poll of my own. Out of the 78 people who voted, only 3 thought it should stay the same and they were 3 who had already voted. AND, Edwards was still in the race at this point.  

    The comments against Florida basically stated that it was the Democratic legislators who went along with the Republicans and it was these Dems who should be blamed and not the DNC. Two things. I blame the DNC for making the threat and not telling the Dems to hang tough. I blame the Dems for giving the GOP a win win situation in Florida and it is. We get to argue, look like heavy handed old time political bosses, and we alienate the voters in Florida.


    I did (none / 0) (#201)
    by auntmo on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 10:19:37 PM EST
    I've  been saying  the  same  for  weeks.

    But  dayum,   if   he  can't  carry  women or  senior  citizens  in FLorida,   he  loses. Period.


    More proof of brain drain (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Jim J on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:22:08 PM EST
    I firmly believe that one of the issues the Democratic Party has faced over the last two decades has been a steady brain drain of its best and brightest, leaving behind only the most corrupt and stupid.

    In effect, the party has self-selected into defeat, "Dr." Dean, Donna Brazile, Bob Shrum, et al, being the poster children for the syndrome.

    Hopefully now that it's finally cool to be a Democrat -- for the first time since Watergate, I guess -- we'll see an influx of competence.

    An influx of competence? (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:30:19 PM EST
    Something to be devoutly wished for...in the party and in government.

    With Hillary, that's the minimum we'll get but at least it's a sure thing.

    Obama?  Roll the dice...

    McCain?  Prayer will be back in style in both parties...


    The Democratic Consultant Class (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by BDB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:37:45 PM EST
    Seems to me to be fairly useless across the board.   Axelrod looks like a genius, but if Obama had 5% less talent, he'd have been out of it long ago.  Penn is also an idiot, IMO.

    The one person who might yet impress is Maggie Williams.  If she turns Clinton's campaign around, then I think we may have found a competent winner, but that's a big if at this point.


    Not if we keep losing. (none / 0) (#45)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:36:12 PM EST
    the brain drain will only increase.

    seat Fl delegates (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by democrat1 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:23:37 PM EST
    because both Obama and Clinton are on the ballot and Obama even ran TV ads.  Michigan is different story as only Clinton is on the ballot.  May be they should have a separate Demcratic Party Primary if rules permit or accept the inevitable Mccain Presidency

    michigan (none / 0) (#121)
    by sancho on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:18:04 PM EST
    remember, only edwards and obama pulled their names off the ballot. the others stayed on--hillary was not alone on the ballot. using the dnc as cover, edwards ("count every vote") and obama in effect disenfranchised michigan voters.  

    MI might but (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Saul on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:23:51 PM EST
    Florida will probably not agree for a second primary. If you do not take the vote like it showed in  Florida originally you will disenfranchise those voters who voted for Hilary and Obama and they will stay home on the general election just out of protest for the way the DNC ends up treating them. From what happen in 2000 they will not trust the numbers coming out of a second primary. So what happens you say if they do not treat the Floridians fair?  2000 happens again.

    If the poll holds, (none / 0) (#83)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:56:56 PM EST
    Obama probably loses in FL with or without a caucus.  I wonder how they are going to spin this.

    Does Obama need to win (none / 0) (#100)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:05:56 PM EST
    Flordia in a Primary to win the nom? Even seated as it it is not enough to push Hillary ahead. No spin needed.

    OMG, this is going to be such a slaughter (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:26:20 PM EST
    in the GE, I am so depressed about it, and I hope and pray we can turn it around.  Karl Rove must be toasting himself these days about his "divide and conquer" strategy...All I can say is after November, if Obama is the nominee and loses this election, his name will be mud in the democratic party as far as I am concerned...and all he had to do was agree to be the VP and coast along for 8 yrs while obtaining experience which he really needs and he was set for life...what a waste...I completely blame Ted Kennedy and John Kerrey for all this mess in their excessive Clinton hatred and jealousy...IMO...

    I have the same sinking feeling (none / 0) (#59)
    by Jim J on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:44:37 PM EST
    Because of his meteoric ascent, when Obama's flameout comes it will be doubly spectacular.

    Pretty fireworks though :-) (none / 0) (#85)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:58:03 PM EST
    flameout (none / 0) (#97)
    by white n az on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:04:17 PM EST
    that isn't gonna happen...

    Obama is in this thing to stay and as far as I can see...he's winning


    People don't like it when their (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by tigercourse on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:27:50 PM EST
    elections are just shams? I'm shocked!

    They don't like it (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:28:47 PM EST
    when one candidate tells them that their vote is a sham.

    huh? (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by Nasarius on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:38:13 PM EST
    The issue here is that not seating the FL delegates absolutely screws the Democrats, but especially Obama, who is in the position of arguing against seating them.

    Do you disagree with any of that?

    I assume you are respondong to a deleted (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:39:10 PM EST
    Off topic post.

    you have it EXACTLY right.


    All you Obama supporters don't realize that (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:46:29 PM EST
    you are winning a battle but losing the war....which is HUGE AND IMPORTANT TO THE PARTY AND THIS NATION.....

    That why Hillary (none / 0) (#104)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:08:00 PM EST
    is double digits below Obama in national polls?

    McCain (none / 0) (#106)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:08:34 PM EST
    match ups. Not Primary.

    you can't be serious (none / 0) (#144)
    by white n az on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:32:53 PM EST
    • a poll of 400/500/600 voters is just a random sampling and not the type of thing to make bank on

    • the poll results a few weeks ago were decidedly different as they will be a few weeks from now

    • the only 'poll' that actually counts is the one where people actually go to polling places and vote and if you think that it is preferable to make decisions on random sampling polls over those where people actually turn off their televisions and go to a polling place and vote, you really need a reality check.

    But they voted already (none / 0) (#155)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:44:20 PM EST
    And as they see the entire primary winding down to needing every single vote, they are getting annoyed that their vote will not count. Wouldn't you?
    I am sure by next week, the poll will show even more voters not amused at the DNC candidates.

    Check out the Quinnipiac poll (none / 0) (#161)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:50:32 PM EST
    released four days ago....It shows McCain leading only by 1 over Hillary and by two over Obama....

    I have posted the link in a post below...

    One poll and everyone rushes over the cliff.  Sheesh....


    It is about the polls and the people we know in Fl (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:15:45 PM EST
    BTD spends a lot of time in Florida. He knows what the general feeling is among the Democrats there.

    I grew up in Florida. I talk to about 3 diffent Floridians a week. Family members in Ft. Pierce.(5)
    College friends in Ft. Lauderdale. (3), College friends in Port St Lucie (2, friends in West Palm Beach (2). All loyal Democrats with the exception of one iffy Indy in WPB. They all and I want to emphasis that, are getting mad that their vote will not count and are getting mad at the DNC. They are seeing the election being close and they want their vote recorded along with the rest of the country. They were not as mad in the beginning and this particular new poll reflects that new anger. AND, their votes were all split 3 ways.


    The flip side of the coin (none / 0) (#109)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:10:54 PM EST
    is that if Hillary uses the Florida delegates to get around an Obama lead in pledged delegates to win the nomination.....you will most likely lose many, many Obama supporters.

    The African-American community would be devastated and stay at home....And after Bill's comments in South Carolina, to pull a fast one to deprive Obama of the nomination, will not sell.

    As to it's working, I actually think Hillary may win Wisconsin and has a good chance of winning the nomination...

    BTD suggests a deal whereby half the delegates are seated, and who knows this may yet occur....but it cannot be outcome determinative...


    Nothing is likely to be outcome determinative (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:12:36 PM EST

    This is going to the Super Delegates.


    Fine, do a deal (none / 0) (#147)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:33:48 PM EST
    It was always assumed that seating the delegations would not be a problem because there would have been a clear winner....

    If that holds up and there is a clear winner, then Fl and Mich can be seated....Otherwise, it would be a big, big problem....

    I suppose you could do a caucus in Mich, and seat half the Fl delegates (as will the Republicans)....but if it changes the outcome....


    talk about (none / 0) (#192)
    by sas on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:17:58 PM EST

    oh yeah, let's do a caucus - where about 1% of the voters show, and give Obama the edge

    not fair to Hillary - how about another primary
    - where she'd probably win

    there should be no do-overs

    Obama made a stupid mistake not to get on the michigan ballot.

    The people in Florida voted with the intent that they would get seated at the convention.

    The DNC is a bunch of LOSERS.


    Not very satisfying (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Democratic Cat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:23:19 PM EST
    I don't like this argument because it suggests that we should only count the votes if they don't matter. I don't see how that helps put FL in the win column in November.

    It won't help at all at this point. (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:34:28 PM EST
    Voting Influence (none / 0) (#174)
    by solon on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:08:19 PM EST
    Currently, the votes in Florida matter to the extent it is influencing the overall election, and it is certainly doing that by the coverage it is receiving.

    The DNC may wait until March 4th to decide this matter. If Senator Obama can win Texas and look like the presumptive nominee, then the the Super Delegates may move to support Obama and, consequently, the vote for Florida will count but not be much of an advantage for Senator Clinton.

    If Senator Clinton wins March 4th and cuts Obama's lead, then Dean will no longer be able to ignore the issue.

    Making Florida count in November may be very hard since the Republicans argue that the Democrats silenced the people. No matter how Democrats counter with the problems of 2000, the emotional power of the recent problems may be more persuasive.

    The Democratic nominee should work in Florida but make certain he/she can win the other swing states: New Mexico, Colorado, Ohio, Missouri, and Virginia.


    didn't HRC (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by NJDem on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:47:40 PM EST
    receive more votes than all of the GOP candidates combined in FL?  I could be wrong, but it was a significant enough of a victory that the fact that she's trailing McCain should be a serious wake up call.

    BTD has it right, talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory...

    I also don't think that the Florida delegates (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:08:18 PM EST
    will accept the halfing of their delegates at this point...they are so mad they want to be fully counted particularly if Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina are.....to do otherwise would be a travesty...

    They might accept it... (none / 0) (#122)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:18:52 PM EST
    depending on who makes the deal.

    Al Gore should stand up for Florida....at long last.


    Florida and Michigan Delegates (5.00 / 4) (#113)
    by loro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:13:29 PM EST
      My husband, daughter, two granddaughters, and I
    all voted for Hillary in the Michigan primary.
    The media here repeatedly told everyone who did not want to vote for Hillary to vote uncommitted."
    Obama's name was on the ballot originally and he
    made the choice to have it removed.  Dodd, Kucinich, and Hillary chose to keep their names on
    the ballot.  It was poor judgement by Obama - no
    one said they had to remove their names. I know
    the media here expected "uncommitted" to win -
    but the Hillary supporters surprised them.
      I am 71 years old, and the first president I
    voted for was JFK.  I have voted for every
    democrat since.  If our delegates are not counted
    and Obama wins the nomination, I will sit this
    election out.  He is not a true democrat.  His
    "democrat for a day" tactics and the "racist"
    accusations against Bill and Hillary have shown
    what he is all about.  I have no respect for him or Jesse Jackson, Jr.

    I won't quite go that far (none / 0) (#115)
    by Jim J on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:15:27 PM EST
    as to not vote for him if he's the nominee, but I agree with everything else you've said.

    Same for me--only the reverse (none / 0) (#165)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:58:33 PM EST
    I am officially an Independent but vote for Democrats--most of the time....

    I have voted recently for Republicans when the Democrat is corrupt....I voted to re-call Gray Davis the governor of the state of California when Ahnold got voted in....I supported Republican LA Mayor Richard Riordan.....

    I have admired, my views are most like, and I would have voted for, Lincoln Chafee the former Repubican Senator from Rhode Island (who voted against the Iraq war).  

    I would not vote for McCain, but many others would....I will not vote for Hillary if she wins in any way other than leading in pledged delegates (aside from Fl or Mich)  


    This is something that really needs to be discusse (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by white n az on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:31:58 PM EST
    I will not vote for Hillary if she wins in any way other than leading in pledged delegates (aside from Fl or Mich)

    1 - There actually is litle difference between the candidates on most issues... See Same Corporatist Whine in New DLC Vessels from Firedoglake.com

    2 - Issues such as the war in Iraq, nominations to SCOTUS, etc. that are just too large to allow the election of John McCain to satisfy one's hurt sense of the way things ought to be.

    3 - Politics is now and has always been a very rough game and if Obama can't play the game well enough to win in the primary season, why on earth would anyone believe that he had a chance to win during the general election?


    Maybe he can't (none / 0) (#194)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:35:27 PM EST
    But he is the only candidate for whom I have done anything other than vote....

    If he doesn't make it, and loses in a tricked up Hillary power move, I'm done with the Democratic Party....I'll go back to the middle where I always have been....

    I will wash my hands of what I always believed was the dirty game of politics and be gone....I know there are many others like me...


    So Obama wins by ignoring two states....WOW (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:44:37 PM EST
    ok after Obama loses in the general election (and I believe he will), he can join up with John Kerry and Ted Kennedy in their own LOSERS CLUB...and by the way, Clinton won't have to be in that club because he WON.....what is wrong with this picture...

    The DNC (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by sas on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:08:06 PM EST
    under Howard Dean is a bunch of friggin idiots.

    I am so ticked off at them I , I'm seeing "red".  

    What a bunch of nitwits for voting not to seat Florida and Michigan delegates - two states we need in the general election.

    Also, they know that there is going to be a bloodbath at the convention.  

    I also predict that McCain will win in a landslide if it's Obama.  Those Florida numbers are just the beginning.  The South, and the midwest will be solidly McCain - Florida included.
    And that's before the party is split at the convention.


    BTD (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by tek on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:49:07 PM EST
    Amen (to the snatching defeat). I know Will Rogers said I'm not part of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat, but it's time to change.

    FL will be seated. (none / 0) (#26)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:29:43 PM EST
    likely at the full count.

    MI is a bit harder though.

    Not a good idea (none / 0) (#40)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:34:31 PM EST
    Florida and Michigan can be seated so long as they don't change the result...If they do, it would create a huge rift.....McCain wins....

    Work it out! (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:36:00 PM EST
    WTF is wrong with you people?

    this is just amazing to me that you still are digging in your heels on this.

    Just reach a compromise. Half the delegates. Whatever you like.

    But this is bigger than Obama and Clinton.


    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by BDB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:40:34 PM EST
    And, as you said, this has been obvious for some time.  If there weren't a total leadership vacuum in the party, Clinton and Obama would've been forced to sit down and work it out already.

    But as with so many things - Iraq, FISA, whatever - the Dem leaders are simply holding their breaths and hoping it works itself out so that they don't have to do anything.   Of course, that presumes there are any Dem leaders that have credibility with Obama and Clinton, other than Gore can anyone think of one?  Any one?  Bueller?  


    Talk has it that our (none / 0) (#64)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:46:47 PM EST
    heroes...Kerry, Gore and Edwards are going to be the 'honest brokers' as party leaders on this one!  Oh my stars...like I'll buy that one.

    They've been meeting...


    That's a brain trust (none / 0) (#68)
    by Jim J on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:49:01 PM EST
    Lord help us, this thing is still loseable after all, isn't it?

    great (none / 0) (#101)
    by white n az on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:06:03 PM EST
    what do they all have in common?

    They all know how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

    Help us...


    Yes. Losers all.... (none / 0) (#107)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:08:59 PM EST
    and they all have their own reasons to favor Obama over Hillary.

    Honest brokers.  Don't make me laugh.


    Well, BTD... (none / 0) (#66)
    by Jim J on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:48:22 PM EST
    Nothing's bigger than Obama, surely you have realized this by now. His is a movement that transcends party. Or so I've been told.

    NO (none / 0) (#180)
    by Maddie In Florida on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:27:06 PM EST
    They won't change the result (none / 0) (#110)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:11:21 PM EST
    enough for her to win.

    Which is fine with me, and a testament to Obama's lead.


    It is not about changing Obama's lead (none / 0) (#163)
    by hairspray on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:55:58 PM EST
    it is about counting the votes. If that doesn't keep Obama in the lead, you need to deal with it.

    Just one poll (none / 0) (#34)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:32:04 PM EST
    after John McCain finished up a big campaign and big win....

    The Florida Democrats are to blame.   The DNC offered to pay for a separate Dem primary that was not prior to 2/5.  The Florida Democrats refused and are now trying to blame the Florida Republicans...

    As noted above (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:33:54 PM EST
    how do you operate a primary without the participation of the state?

    By paying for it (none / 0) (#48)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:37:18 PM EST
    The DNC had it worked out for a separate primary....If you have any contrary info....

    You are just wrong (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:40:21 PM EST
    And off topic.

    You want to be stubborn. WORK IT OUT.

    Clinton AND Obama. This is much bigger than either of them.

    FIX IT.


    Off-topic? (none / 0) (#86)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:58:13 PM EST
    Yes, I thought that would be coming...

    I am talking about seating the Florida delegation and why that should not occur......


    Yes off topic (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:07:45 PM EST
    This is BIGGER than the merits of whether Florida falls under Rule 21.

    This is about winning in November.

    You can take you legal argument and do what with it when we lose FL in November.

    STOP being so petty.

    We need to work this out.


    STOP IT (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:34:22 PM EST
    Just stop it.

    This is Dean and Brazile's fault.

    Cutting off their nose to spite their face.

    And you Obama supporters come in here and try to spin this.

    My gawd, this is bigger than Obama or Clinton.


    Just stop. Now.


    It is possible to make up for FL (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:36:35 PM EST
    in the mountain west. The question is, what do we do if FL is totally out of contention? McCain WILL poach Pennsylvania. It's over.

    IMO Gun Issue Will Hurt In The Mountain West n/t (none / 0) (#157)
    by MO Blue on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:45:35 PM EST
    Respond to the merits (none / 0) (#44)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:36:04 PM EST
    Did or did not the DNC agree to fund a separate primary for Florida?

    NO (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:37:16 PM EST
    They did not.

    And that is NOT the merits and it is pathetic that you think it is.

    the merits is winning in November.


    NO (5.00 / 5) (#52)
    by RalphB on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:38:31 PM EST
    they offered a stupid caucus with 150 voting locations.  stop the spinning.

    Pay for the primary (none / 0) (#74)
    by wasabi on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:52:46 PM EST
    The DNC offered $880,000 to Florida to hold an election.  Their primary costs over $7M to do.

    The Florida Democrats voted (none / 0) (#62)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:45:47 PM EST
    to move up the Primary:

    The Florida legislature voted via House Bill 537 to move forward the date of their state's primary to January 29th, causing a chain reaction which moved many other states' primaries and caucuses to much earlier dates. The vote passed with bipartisan support 118 to 0 in the House, 37 to 2 in the Senate

    And Florida Dems will vote for the Republican (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:51:20 PM EST
    in November as a result of the DNC's stupidity.

    Man are you stubborn.


    Yes (none / 0) (#182)
    by Maddie In Florida on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:28:49 PM EST
    Do you want to be honest (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:52:57 PM EST
    and say what else was in the bill?

    obviously not (5.00 / 3) (#92)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:00:54 PM EST
    So I will say it: the bill was tied to another that called for paper proof from electronic voting machines.  If the Dems had voted against it, they would have been crucified.

    To say that they voted "for" moving the primaries is misleading.  =


    Now, now (none / 0) (#149)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:36:01 PM EST
    You obviosuly did not read my post asking for the details...

    Attacking my "honesty" is.... ahem...counter-productive...


    Tell me (none / 0) (#89)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:59:43 PM EST
    what else was in the bill....

    This has already been discussed (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by rebecca on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:00:23 PM EST
    That legislation was an omnibus bill that contained legislation about paper trails.  The Democrats were for moving the election forward as were many states look at the Super Tuesday line up.  But the Republicans decided to take it further.  The Democrats tried to amend the bill but were outvoted.  They voted for the omnibus bill not for the early start which they tried to fix.  So it's not their fault it's the Republicans.  

    Even if it were the Democratic politicians fault you have the problem that the people who were harmed by the penalty set are the voters.  The voters did nothing wrong.  They deserve just as any other group of voters to have their votes count.  It's a travesty that the netroots which have been working against Republicans disenfranchising Democrats to now see some of the same people fighting to disenfranchise Democrats.

    Look at that poll.  This is hurting your candidate.  This is a serious problem for him in the GE.  Can you look past supporting Obama and look at how this is affecting our party and our GE chances?


    Blame FLA (none / 0) (#123)
    by BlueMainer on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:20:44 PM EST
    DNC offered to pay for a rescheduled primary when that problem came up. FLA dems wouldn't go for it.

    You are lying (none / 0) (#125)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:22:49 PM EST
    Please stop it.

    Not lying (none / 0) (#160)
    by BlueMainer on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:49:16 PM EST
    Whether it was caucus or primary, the DNC made an offer and was turned down.

    There's a big difference (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by rebecca on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:02:18 PM EST
    between a caucus and a primary.  You're talking about the difference between 1.6 million votes and perhaps some tens of thousand votes.  How would that look?  You can't just exchange 1.6 million votes for 150 caucus spots.  If by chance the votes at the caucus came out for Obama you'd have people certain this was just a vote stealing scam.  Right now it's bad enough a caucus would make it worse.  The Democratic politicians in FL were bright enough to figure that out and not risk their jobs over that why weren't the people who came up with a caucus?  We don't need anymore stupidity of this sort going on in this mess.

    Blame FL? (none / 0) (#132)
    by rebecca on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:25:44 PM EST
    I heard about the DNC offering to pay for 150 caucus' but I never heard about them paying for primaries which as I understand it would have to have the help of the state which being held by Republicans wouldn't do a thing to get us out of the mess the DNC has made for us here.  Perhaps you could link to that offer of a primary by the DNC?

    Caucus' would make the entire mess worse.  Throwing out the votes of 1.6 million people for the few people who would get to the 150 caucus' they were going to pay for?  If Obama happened to win the caucus it would be seen to be an out right stolen election.  Just what we need to add to this mess.  


    Well, there you go (none / 0) (#77)
    by phat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:54:50 PM EST
    I'm convinced that Obama loses Florida, no matter what.

    Clinton might be able to win Florida.



    Convinced (none / 0) (#114)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:15:02 PM EST
    by one poll? That didn't take much.

    It's not this one poll (none / 0) (#126)
    by phat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:22:55 PM EST
    But this poll certainly doesn't help.



    Well at least the registered Democrats of this (none / 0) (#81)
    by athyrio on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:55:32 PM EST
    great nation have had it right all along...they have been voting for Hillary consistantly from the get go....Ya cant fool us ole registered democrats....LOL.....

    It Behooves Obama and his Supporters (none / 0) (#82)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:55:45 PM EST
    To take a position that Florida should be seated.  It behooves them to lobby Dean and co. to do so.  And then it behooves them to win Texas, Iowa and Pennsylvania so there's no question as to who won the primary.  To win the rest of the primary in such a way that renders the verdict in Florida and Michigan moot.

    To launch a General Election candidacy with question marks is not a good idea.

    I know you're more concerned about emotions in Florida, and I believe that is clearly an issue that must be contended with, but I'm adding in a different component.

    In every election, there is always the question "Did we nominate/elect the right person?" and typically it's simply just the result of sour grapes and eventually people get over it.  

    They move on.

    When you add a logical foundation, REASONABLE DOUBT, to the sour grapes you get bad things, democratically speaking.  It lingers.  People don't get over it.

    They don't move on.

    I'll Add This (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:05:34 PM EST
    If Obama wins the rest of the contest in such a way that Florida and Michigan don't matter, and THEN they decide to acknowledge those delegates, it's going to stink of something very awful and disgusting.

    So just to add, it is something that needs to be resolved sooner than later.


    a gift to Hillary (none / 0) (#120)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:17:55 PM EST
    which thankfully Obama can afford.

    I hope if FL and MI are seated as is and Obama still leads in pledged delegates and pop vote, we can all agree he was the better canidate.


    The Gift to Obama (none / 0) (#142)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:31:37 PM EST
    The balance of this entire issue still tilts to Obama.

    I'm trying to be nice.

    It's not a gift to re-instate something that never should have been taken away to begin with.

    It's simply an idea, a way Obama can add some legitimacy to this Primary.


    It is a gift in that (1.00 / 1) (#162)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:52:18 PM EST
    no really believes she would have gotten that much of the vote in a real campaign.

    It's a Gift (5.00 / 2) (#169)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:03:44 PM EST
    In that Obama would have been much more behind sooner, and that might have had an impact on super tuesday and the rest of the campaign.

    As it stood, he wasn't going to win, even by less of a margin, and so it allowed him to focus resources elsewhere.

    Screwed up situation, in the end I'll always believe it beneffitted Obama more than it benefitted Clinton.   I mean even my suggestion above is sort of pointless at this point because what's done is done.

    Two states.  Florida and Michigan.  Two large states were rendered by the Democratic Party as having no say whatsoever.  This is what the DNC decided about these states.  These are both states where Clinton was ahead.

    Balance it out.  Obama's not crying!


    you are out of here (none / 0) (#185)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:44:33 PM EST
    JDJ has been warned to stop chattering. He didn't listen. He is now banned from this site.  There are 65 of his comments from today alone still on the site. I'll be going through them to delete more of them.

    Come on Jim (none / 0) (#98)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:05:09 PM EST
    That is ridiculous. The are trying to win. Just like Clinton.

    You're right (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by Jim J on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:11:36 PM EST
    In retrospect, "solipsist" seems to be more fitting than "nihilist," I take that back.

    There seems to be a nearly palpable disdain for Florida emanating from the Obama camp, followers as well as staff. It reminds me of the disdain Republicans show Massachusetts, i.e., publicly citing it as a de facto bad place on its face, etc.

    Almost as if, because Obama is not worshipped there, Florida does not actually exist.


    Pretty Much (none / 0) (#108)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:09:39 PM EST
    Obama is just like Clinton as far as Politics and elections are concerned.

    Jim's point is probably not to contend your point, but exists in the context of the Obama folks claiming to be different.

    Remember when "In it to win it," was considered a horrible thing to say.


    Aw,But there comes the experience factor (none / 0) (#168)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:02:36 PM EST
    She did not remove her name from the Michigan primary.

    She did not pledge a match of public funds to a Republican candidate.

    Mistakes have been made by both, but some of them show a follow the penguin over the clift vs not going along with the crowd just to be popular. And again, I was for Edwards when all this happened so I give him a kick in the shins too.


    Your anger is misplaced, BTD (none / 0) (#118)
    by BlueMainer on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:16:55 PM EST
    Shouldn't you be directing your anger at the FLA Dems who got their delegates into this mess? The DNC laid it out there, and even offered to pay for rescheduling the primary, but the FLA dems vetoed that idea. And you think we should start the panic now, 9 months before the general? Or, as you are suggesting, we should hurry up and give HRC the delegates before she gets any farther behind?

    No (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:21:35 PM EST
    That was then and the merits of who was wrong is simply strongly against you.

    But... (none / 0) (#146)
    by BlueMainer on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:33:16 PM EST
    if we seat the delegates as things stand now, what's to prevent states in the future from trying to leapfrog ahead of each other? There would be a precedent - FLA broke the rules, the DNC punished them, then took it all back and said sorry? That hardly sounds reasonable.

    I do not care (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:40:57 PM EST
    about the primary calendar which is a disaster already. Let them all move up to January 1.

    Who give a sh*t?

    I care about NOVEMBER 1008.


    Bit late for that, champ (5.00 / 3) (#159)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:49:06 PM EST
    I think the Holy Roman Empire is beyond repair.

    Heh (5.00 / 2) (#173)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:07:36 PM EST
    2012 of course.

    Maybe this mess will be a wake up (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by hairspray on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:05:53 PM EST
    call to the DNC to schedule primaries in a more equitable way.  There are several plans that are more fair than what we are stuck with now.  They should fix it by 2012.

    First of all you're wrong (5.00 / 2) (#171)
    by rebecca on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:05:58 PM EST
    You need to read up on what really happened in FL.  

    The Rules say you had to try to stop the primary move, but Democrats voted for the law. What gives?
    Initially, before a specific date had been decided upon by the Republicans, some Democrats did actively support the idea of moving earlier in the calendar year.  That changed when Speaker Rubio announced he wanted to break the Rules of the Democratic and Republican National Committees. Following this announcement, DNC and Florida Democratic Party staff talked about the possibility that our primary date would move up in violation of Rule 11.A.

    Party leaders, Chairwoman Thurman and members of Congress then lobbied Democratic members of the Legislature through a variety of means to prevent the primary from moving earlier than February 5th.  Party leadership and staff spent countless hours discussing our opposition to and the ramifications of a pre-February 5th primary with legislators, former and current Congressional members, DNC members, DNC staff, donors, activists, county leaders, media, legislative staff, Congressional staff, municipal elected officials, constituency leaders, labor leaders and counterparts in other state parties.  In response to the Party's efforts, Senate Democratic Leaders Geller and Wilson and House Democratic Leaders Gelber and Cusack introduced amendments to CS/HB 537 to hold the Presidential Preference Primary on the first Tuesday in February, instead of January 29th. These were both defeated by the overwhelming Republican majority in each house.

    The primary bill, which at this point had been rolled into a larger legislation train, went to a vote in both houses. It passed almost unanimously. The final bill contained a whole host of elections legislation, much of which Democrats did not support. However, in legislative bodies, the majority party can shove bad omnibus legislation down the minority's throats by attaching a couple of things that made the whole bill very difficult, if not impossible, to vote against. This is what the Republicans did in Florida, including a vital provision to require a paper trail for Florida elections. There was no way that any Florida Democratic Party official or Democratic legislative leader could ask our Democratic members, especially those in the Florida Legislative Black Caucus, to vote against a paper trail for our elections. It would have been embarrassing, futile, and, moreover, against Democratic principles.

    Second of all three other states bumped up with no penalty at all.  What does that say to other states about moving their date up?  That if you're in the good graces of the party you can do what you want but if you're not you're in trouble no matter that you're not guilty of anything other than having Republicans in charge of your legislature.  Good lesson for everyone.  


    rebecca (none / 0) (#204)
    by auntmo on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 10:42:03 PM EST
    Word is,  Donna  Brazille  pushed  for the  stripping  of  all  delegates  from  Florida  and  Michigan  (not  the  50% rule)

    Why  do  we  all think she  did  that?    



    It would be so easy to agree (none / 0) (#208)
    by rebecca on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 12:03:01 AM EST
    But I don't give her credit for that much ability.  We're talking about someone who doesn't really have a great record on her political ability.  I also don't think it was her alone in this stupidity.

    I rather think they wanted to just make a point and used FL and MI to make their point.  The problem I think was that they assumed that this would all be over on Super Tuesday.  If it had ended on Super Tuesday then the candidate would have seated them with no effect on the election.  It would have been a short term penalty.  But because they didn't consider that this could go on this long or that it might be this close they are unprepared for dealing with the political ramifications of their actions.  

    So they are doing what most people who are not really capable generally do.  They are just waiting and hoping that it will all work itself out without any need for them to put themselves at risk by suggesting a solution that could blow up in their faces.  Quite frankly I see this as a result of incompetence rather than wily political machinations.  


    I am a Hillary supporter (none / 0) (#119)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:17:08 PM EST
    (had to get that out of the way) but I wonder what is really going on here.  We are blaming Howard Dean for not doing anything, but do we know that for a fact?  Or, is this a case where, behind the scenes, Dean is working furiously to bring together the candidates, but neither candidate (and by neither, I mean both) is amenable?

    Because, let's take this a step further: If Obama agrees to seat the delegates, then he has a steep uphill battle.  If Clinton takes half of the delegates, then she's not ahead as much.  Same with caucus vs. primary--good for Obama/bad for Clinton.

    Dean cannot really force them to do anything at this point because each candidate has very, very powerful backers and are running within a razor's edge.  BTD, I know you came up with a seemingly fair resolution, but it does not take into account two ultra-competitive candidates who have spent a ton of money and time who want to WIN.  Fairness is not an issue for them.

    You are a lawyer, so I am sure you've had many cases where there is the defendant's solution, the plaintiff's solution, and the logical solution.  Very seldom is there a confluence between all three.  (Good thing, or you would be out of a job.)

    So, I'll put this to you: what would be a compromise solution that would make both Clinton and Obama happy?  How, excactly, should King Solomon, er, I mean Howard Dean, slice up this baby?

    If FL can be seated (none / 0) (#129)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:23:27 PM EST
    as is, can we drop the certain states/votes don't count talk and agree that pledged delegates/pop vote should be the deciding factor in the nom?

    Is that the editorial 'we' or (none / 0) (#133)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:25:49 PM EST
    the imperial 'we,' as in "We are not amused?"

    I do not think (none / 0) (#181)
    by Kathy on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:27:39 PM EST
    Obama will agree to that proposition because it gives Clinton both the popular vote and the delegate lead.

    Is it too late? (none / 0) (#127)
    by OrangeFur on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:23:01 PM EST
    Even if Florida is seated now, will the damage be undone? Will the Florida Dems forgive the national party? Feeling might still be raw from being repeatedly told that they didn't count.

    If they're only seated after it's clear they wouldn't make a difference, it might feel the same as if they were never counted. And they had all of their clout removed. Look how the candidates fawned over Washington, the Potomac Primaries, Wisconsin, etc., all of whom are much smaller than Florida.

    There's 27 electoral votes down the drain right there. Way to go, guys.

    I don't think it is too late (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:07:24 PM EST
    But it can become too late if some sort of action is not taken soon. That is what this diary is about. The polls are changing and in the wrong direction. Not for the candidate but for the party and the general election.

    Here is a different recent poll (none / 0) (#134)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:26:07 PM EST
    Here is the Quinnipiac Poll in Florida released four days ago:

    In these two states and Florida, a swing state that already conducted a primary, Arizona Sen. John McCain, the Republican front-runner, is running neck and neck with either Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama. Results are:  
    Florida: McCain 44 percent - Clinton 42 percent; McCain 41 percent - Obama 39 percent;

    No need to panic over one poll; no need to stampede to Hillary's position, either.

    so the sky (5.00 / 0) (#138)
    by jdj on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:28:15 PM EST
    has not fallen?

    Get a calendar. (none / 0) (#140)
    by oldpro on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:30:13 PM EST

    It's usually in the Fall.


    That one says the same thing (none / 0) (#136)
    by andgarden on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:27:45 PM EST
    but Rasmussen pushes the leaners.

    Please stop it (none / 0) (#139)
    by Democratic Cat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:30:08 PM EST
    OrangeFur did not say that.

    Thanks. (none / 0) (#145)
    by OrangeFur on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:33:12 PM EST

    Just FYI (none / 0) (#175)
    by jibeaux on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:08:44 PM EST
    I cut and pasted Rasmussen poll results from some other states.  This is evidently considered "trolling".  Maybe it's poll-trolling.  I suggest reading them anyway.

    Just fyi (none / 0) (#178)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:14:06 PM EST
    This post is about the DNC not seating delegates in FL, it is not meant to be about who is electable in another state.

    You comment was DELIBERATELY off topic.

    If you like, you can post your comment in the Open Thread.

    That is something we strictly enforce at this site.


    No, it wasn't. (none / 0) (#184)
    by jibeaux on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:40:41 PM EST
    You wrote that the DNC was looking to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.   You wrote that the DNC was going to cost the Democrats Florida in the general election.

    I should think that McCain leading both candidates in Florida rather undercuts that argument, since there would be no victory either way.

    You cited a Rasmussen poll in Florida, I cited Rasmussen polls in other states that were also revealing and relevant to the topic of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    I certainly could write about how HRC is trying to change the rules after the fact, too.  FL and MI knew they were going to get smacked down if they moved their primaries, they moved them anyway, and they got smacked down.  Ironically, if they'd had them at the usual times, they would have been much more interesting.  I could have written about how even many HRC supporters find her attempts to rewrite decisions, even dumb decisions, after the fact, disturbing.  I could write those things, but you would delete it, too.

    Actually (none / 0) (#188)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:51:04 PM EST
    IF you write about he Florida and MI delegate situation, you would be on topic.

    What your previous post was was NOT about Florida OR Michigan.

    But it does ot mater, I am telling you I consider it  off topic and I am the judge of these things in my threads.


    whoops (none / 0) (#189)
    by jibeaux on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:56:34 PM EST
    Hillary's trump card:  "nominate me or we lose Florida."

    I was pointing out that that wasn't actually true (see earlier analysis of Red v. Red, haven't seen that discussed yet), and was counterbalanced by other states.


    Where the hell is that n my post? (none / 0) (#193)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:20:38 PM EST
    Do you just make sh*t up now to respond to?

    It is post #14 (none / 0) (#199)
    by jibeaux on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 09:25:43 PM EST
    I accidentally wrote "you posted", then hit enter, so that's all it posted, and that got deleted.  You posted a comment that was essentially making the inverse point of the one I posted.  May I suggest the "find" function.

    Not from me (none / 0) (#205)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 10:44:43 PM EST
    You are making sh*t up.

    I said it was a nonissue.


    quite apart from the fact that... (none / 0) (#187)
    by jibeaux on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:48:07 PM EST
    There is no way whatsoever of knowing WHY Florida voters are making decisions the way they are.  Maybe they're just going to vote for McCain anyway because he's younger than they are.  Maybe they prefer Hillary's stance on Cuba to Obama's.  You cannot draw a conclusion about the significance of the DNC's actions in Florida based on those kinds of poll results.  The only purpose head-to-head polls really serve is in gauging the state of the horse race.  That's what I did with them.

    I agree. Rasmussen Report (none / 0) (#203)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 10:39:38 PM EST
    does not state the telephone questions included asking Dems. if they sd. yes to McCain due to DNC/FL primary mess up. Doesn't mean it isn't a good idea to seat delegates from MI and FL.

    Can someone explain (none / 0) (#190)
    by mg7505 on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:57:52 PM EST
    why Obama and Edwards took their names off the Michigan ballot but not the FL ballot? Was there some substantive difference between the two situations? If not, that's another charge against BO, Dean et al.

    I think the DNC just needs to acknowledge the blunder, seat FL, hold a Michigan primary, and make it clear that ALL states violating in the future will have their delegates pulled. There's no easy way out and it's better for the DNC to take the rap than let it fall on either candidate, because people don't need another reason to vote Republican in the fall.

    Obama And Edwards Took Their Names (none / 0) (#195)
    by MO Blue on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 08:37:44 PM EST
    off the Michigan ballot to pander to Iowa in the hopes that they would win there and sweep the rest much like Kerry did in 04. Candidate names could not be removed from the Florida ballots due state rules.

    Comments Closing (none / 0) (#209)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 12:59:16 AM EST
    We're about at 200, thanks for your thoughts.