FL Dems: Your Chance Tell The FL Dem Party What You Want Done About A Revote Primary

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

If, like me, you favor a revote in Florida, or if like Jeralyn, you oppose a revote in Florida, and you are a Florida Dem, here is your chance to tell the Florida Democratic Party what you think:

Please read the memo from Chairwoman Thurman about a suggested solution, and submit your input by Friday, 3/14/08, at 6:00 PM EST. No decision will be made until we hear from Florida Democrats. Thank you.

You can download the memo here: PDF Link

You can read the press release here: Link

Let's make this an Open Thread.

< Revote Recap: MI Dems Fighting For Their Voters, FL Dems Intent On Handing FL to The GOP | The Risks And Potential Rewards Of An Obama GE Candidacy >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    How refreshing (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Democratic Cat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:18:55 AM EST
    They actually want to hear what the people have to say about this!

    Florida Phoenix Rising. (5.00 / 5) (#19)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:30:52 AM EST
    My name is Marguerite Cantine Quantaine.

    I am a feminist.

    My mother was a Rosie Riveter.

    My grandmother was a suffragette.

    My great grandmother was a pioneer.

    My great-great grandmother was an abolitionist.

    My great-great-great grandmother was a daughter of the American Revolution.

    My great-great-great-great grandmother was a Mother of the American Revolution.

    My great-great-great-great-great grandmother was a colonist who cleared land, and planted seeds, and bore the generation of children who became the first full fledged Americans.

    Some were state officials serving during disputes over the passage of our Constitution, and the ratification of our Bill of Rights. Others were farmers, artists, writers, musicians, machinists, educators, factory workers, waitresses, floor washers, and entrepreneurs.

    My ancestors volunteered and fought for this nation in every battle from the French & Indian War through World War II. They were the Minutemen, the scouts, the clerks, the infantry, the officers, the petty officers, and the scribes.

    My grandfather was one of the Marines personally chosen by Teddy Roosevelt to sail on the U.S.S. Alabama as part of a battalion of ships sent around the world exemplifying his policy to, "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."

    Their blood is in the belly of our battlefields. Their history haunts my heart. Their spirits champion my soul.

    I voted for Hillary Clinton in the January 29 Florida primary.  

    I will not be told a rule governing a date change takes precedent over the ballots cast by 1.7 million citizens.

    I will not be disenfranchised by the Democratic National Committee.

    I will not be silenced by opportunistic pleas for civility.

    I will not be chastised by rants of racism, black or white, when everyone knows, to some degree, racism is the mirrored image of us all.

    I urge you to count the Florida votes as cast.

    Levy fines against the political parties of Florida if you must.

    But cease and desist in punishing the people.

    If we must descend by the hundreds, by the thousands, by the hundreds of thousands, clamoring at the convention hall doors, demanding to be heard -- so be it.

    I am an American-American.

    And, as God is my witness, my vote will count.

    What about the folks who stayed home (none / 0) (#21)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:37:30 AM EST
    because they thought it didn't matter?  Why should they be defrauded?  The disenfranchisement argument cuts both ways on this one.  That's why revotes are the best solution.

    The people who stayed home (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:48:00 AM EST
    on an election day, when they were notified of an election, and knew changes to the Florida Constitution, tax, and property law were also on the ballot, relinquished their rights when they ignored their responsibility, and stayed home.

    There is no freedom more sacred to an American than the right to vote.

    It is the FIRST right guaranteed by our Constitution.

    Those who make excuses to stay home on election day, ANY election day, are part of the problem, not the solution.

    They always have been.

    They always will be.


    well said Marguerite, n/t (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:05:28 AM EST
    There were (none / 0) (#81)
    by ding7777 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23:29 AM EST
    over 600,000 voters who voted for/against the Property tax but did not cast a Presidential ballot.  

    I don't agree with it, but I do think a case could be made that over 1.5% of the actual voters thought their vote would not count.


    Closed Primary (none / 0) (#86)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:30:41 AM EST
    We call those voters Independent, other party or non-affiliated voters. There are 2,240,318 voters who could not vote for Presidential nominees but could still vote on the amendment.

    In my county, Orange, there was a story in the paper about people who showed up at the polls who thought they were registered Dems but were registered as no party. Apparently they did the motor-voter registration and either they didn't check Dem or something went wrong in the system. They were asking for Dem ballots but couldn't get them. Only difference on the ballot was the ability to vote for the nominee that wouldn't count. They thought it mattered enough not only to vote, but to lodge official complaints because they couldn't.

    The figure I had previously calculated was 466,095 more votes on the ballot not 600k.


    Oh come on! (none / 0) (#122)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:53:11 PM EST
    I was registered as an independent. I went in and changed my registration to Democrat so I could vote.

    This isn't rocket science.

    This is about individual RESPONSIBILITY, not about last minute wannabes.

    Voting is obviously IMPORTANT and should be treated with the attention and time and respect it deserves.

    Did any of you defenders of the DUH write
    email@fladems.com and express any support for the people who did their duty as citizens and went to the polls and voted?

    Or is it easier to defend the shirkers? Because there is no excuse for not voting in Florida.

    You can do it by absentee ballot without giving a reason for being absent. You can vote at your Supervisors office. Or you can show up at the polls.

    Newspaper articles and the Supervisor of Elections tell you in advance you must register in the party of your nominees choice to vote in a primary.

    Oh, duh, teacher, I missed those 30 ads and articles in the paper, all those editorials, and I didn't read my mail those days, it's not my fault, the dog ate my information.

    And barfed.


    Oh come on what? (none / 0) (#128)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:30:20 PM EST
    Someone posts that because some voted on the amendment but not on the pres nomination that it shows they thought their votes didn't count. I point out that non party members and a closed primary system explain that. And your response is WHAT?

    Seriously, are you responding to my point that people thought it mattered enough to vote and there is NO evidence in the vote that people didn't think it mattered by lecturing me on how important it is to vote? I know how important it is to vote. And how important it is to read someone's post instead of read into it.


    Yet Florida had a record turnout (none / 0) (#136)
    by MichaelGale on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 03:55:18 PM EST
    of Democrats who did vote

    They had the opportunity (none / 0) (#119)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:40:58 PM EST
    to vote -- they were in the booth -- they had the ballot in front of them -- they chose NOT to vote -- how is that anyone's fault but their own?

    Ignorance as an excuse?




    For crying our loud, stop blaming the people who DID vote for those who had the chance and didn't.


    That's just a bait and switch (none / 0) (#107)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:56:11 AM EST
    They didn't forfeit their right to vote for presidential candidates.  They were told it wouldn't count, and now you want to turn that into a lie by making it count.  They did forfeit their rights to vote on the other ballot issues, because they did know that those votes would count.

    Also, the Constitution doesn't guarantee you the right to vote in a party primary, and the First Amendment doesn't guarantee you any voting rights at all.  This is just emotional rhetoric with no basis in fact or logic.


    No different than... (none / 0) (#68)
    by DudeE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:14:31 AM EST
    ...people who choose not to vote because they don't think the race is close enough to make a difference.  Their choice and nobody denied them the opportunity.

    Completely different (none / 0) (#108)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:03:16 PM EST
    What you describe is a rational decision based on facts.  Telling people that an election is one thing when in fact it's another is fraud and a sham.

    It's disturbing that so many "Democrats" fail to understand this fundamental principle of democracy


    Were you a Floridian (none / 0) (#115)
    by 0 politico on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:31:58 PM EST
    who passed up on your chance to vote, regardless of what was being said at the time?

    No, but all the evidence suggests (none / 0) (#117)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:36:37 PM EST
    that many did.

    And at any rate, my point still stands that saying an election will be for A, then changing it to B after the votes are counted, is fraudulent.  If you can rebut that proposition, please do.  I've been arguing about this for weeks and have yet to see someone even attempt.


    All well and good (none / 0) (#24)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:40:25 AM EST
    but if Hillary doesn't have a united party, she will lose the general election. The first female nominee must win.

    Any counting of the Florida votes which determines the outcome of the primary which is not perceived as fair will be a loss to all.

    No question in my mind Hillary would win a re-vote. Hillary is for a revote last I saw. Get on board and support your candidate.


    Molly, you miss the point. (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:03:13 AM EST
    It doesn't matter who the nominee turns out to be.

    If we allow our right to vote to be taken away from us at any time, by any one, for any reason, we have lost.

    We have ALL lost.

    Not just Florida and Michigan.

    Voting is our only voice. It is our only chance. It is our only hope.

    The talking heads, and party leaders, and candidates, and media have turned our heads and hearts away from the ONLY issue.

    This entire nation should rise up and demand our votes be counted.

    If they don't, it's only a matter of time before other excuses will be used to silence the voice of the people.

    Has history taught us nothing at all?


    I would have to disagree about MI (none / 0) (#74)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:16:44 AM EST
    though.  FL had everyone on the ballot, MI didn't..

    My gripe about MI is that Edwards wasn't on the ballot either.  Had all candidates campaigned there and Edwards done well, either won or solid second maybe his fortunes would have been better.  I just don't see how MI can ever be a fair vote since we'll never know if MI was the state that could have changed this whole primary.  If Edwards won maybe he goes on a roll and either Obama or Clinton would have been the one forced out.  Now we talk of what is fair only concerning Obama and Clinton.  Leaving what is fair to the voters out as well---which you so eloquently stated.

    The DNC, specifically Dean, need to take a long hard look at how they are managing our party or the gains we have a chance to make because of Bush's mistakes might be a fleeting thing.


    but, had everyone been on ballot in MI (none / 0) (#78)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:20:09 AM EST
    then regardless of campaigning you are 100% correct...people knew the candidates and if they chose not to vote then they don't deserve to have a voice.

    I understand your point (none / 0) (#80)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:23:26 AM EST
    you fail to factor in the fact as it now stands, the votes won't be counted at all because, like it or not, fair or not, votes were done in a non-sanctioned party primary. This is a party election, not a general election.

    The party is entitled to make the rules for its primaries. Like it or not, difficult as it may be to comprehend, there was no vote to count.

    We have already been disenfranchised because the Florida party (whether forced by a GOP controlled legislature and Governor or not) failed to comply with the rules regarding the dates. Were we over sanctioned? You bet. Does that change the initial facts? No.

    The entire nation should demand there be a vote.

    If Hillary is not afraid of a re-vote, you shouldn't be.


    I think I've demonstrated (none / 0) (#118)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:37:06 PM EST
    I'm not afraid.

    Why Is A Revote (none / 0) (#100)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:47:37 AM EST
    All about dishonoring you and robbing you and your blue blood ancestors.

    Your vote was at best, going to equal 1/2 vote because the primary was moved up against the rules. Yes I know that it was GOP dirty dealing but those Republicans were voted in by people just as patriotic as you and have a majority in FL legislature. That is what your ancestors fought for: majority rule.

    Seems to me that a revote would help HRC, and respect he values your ancestors fought for.  If I were them I would be rolling in my grave for being placed on a fainting couch over this.


    My vote is (none / 0) (#135)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 03:30:24 PM EST
    the only one I can fight for.

    Everyone has just one vote and no one can protect it for them.

    You must take action alone.

    But if each of us speaks out, the potential is the roar of 1.7 million voices being heard.

    If all you saw in what I wrote is an opportunity to take a cheap shot by calling my heritage "blue blood" then your anger and animosity goes much deeper than any discussion here.

    Only 1/3 of this country went to war against England to gain our independence.

    The "blue bloods" didn't want to cause waves, or interfere with their incomes. Civility being the great controller of the masses even then.

    My heritage came from the trenches.

    And, since you didn't notice, I'm still in one of them, doing vote-by-vote combat.

    So, please, spare me the indignation by redirecting your anger issues towards Howard Dean, Donna Brazile, and the DNC where they belong, and could do some good.

    Just a thought.


    Actually (none / 0) (#137)
    by CST on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 04:05:30 PM EST
    None of us went to war against the English.

    DAR (none / 0) (#138)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 06:56:37 PM EST
    Everyone has just one vote and no one can protect it for them.
    Evidentially not this time. And had you been staying informed you would have known that your vote was at best going to be diluted by half and at worst not counted. Do you think that states should do as they please regarding primaries, when there are rules set by the national parties?

    And I have no problem with blue bloods. Many of them were revolutionaries, and leading thinkers. My mistake to confuse you with one. It is just that whenever I hear about Mayflower lineage I assume that they were related to royals, my bad.

    As waving the flag (and your patriotic ancestors) around to give weight to your argument for seating the FL delegates does not impress me. I do not see what they have to do with one another.

    You are entitled to your opinion but spare me the credentials used only as a way to get a leg up for your argument.


    Oh, And (none / 0) (#139)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 07:19:22 PM EST
    I certainly don't blame you for being POed. I would be too in your situation. That is why I am surprised that you are not arguing for a re-vote.

    Obama won't have a united party either. (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Boston Boomer on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:12:01 AM EST
    More than half of Democrats who voted in primaries have voted for Hillary so far.

    Yes Obama needs a unified party too (none / 0) (#83)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:27:31 AM EST
    How does that change anything I said?

    As for your other comment,  more people voted for Obama who were entitled to vote.

    Again, if Hillary is not afraid of a re-vote, you shouldn't be either.


    actually obama won't win either. (none / 0) (#64)
    by hellothere on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:13:02 AM EST
    A point I already noted (none / 0) (#84)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:27:57 AM EST
    and concur with.

    yes, isn't it sad. it is like watching (none / 0) (#130)
    by hellothere on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 02:15:08 PM EST
    a car wreck and not being able to stop it. but that's me.

    your post (none / 0) (#50)
    by JerseyBeth on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:01:25 AM EST
    I wish I could vote for you.

    seconded! n/t (none / 0) (#59)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:08:41 AM EST
    How does your vote not count? (none / 0) (#99)
    by fuzzyone on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:47:35 AM EST
    You have an opportunity to vote, as does every other democrat in Florida.  This is a party election.  The prior primary violated party rules, so it does not count.  How are you disenfranchised?

    Thanks! (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by geordie on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:37:07 AM EST
    As a Florida Democrat, thanks for the link - I went there and told them I want a re-vote.  I was an Edwards supporter, and since I am disgusted with both Clinton and Obama right now, I'm not sure who I'd vote for in a re-vote.  But I want a chance for my vote to count, whoever it's for - and, more importantly, I don't want Florida to automatically go Republican just because our pathetic state party officials end up alienating a lot of Florida Dems with their shenanigans on the primary.

    you have a right to be heard no matter (none / 0) (#66)
    by hellothere on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:14:13 AM EST
    who your candidate is.

    It works both ways... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:41:32 AM EST
    Obama supporters claimed Hillary's VP comment was racist code for - "Obama, get to the back of the bus."

    Obama supporters are now calling for Hillary to withdraw - clearly sexist since males have always controlled the White House.

    yeah (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:42:55 AM EST
    over at that blog that will remain nameless this is being spun as completely Hillarys fault.

    I wonder how poor (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:47:00 AM EST
    Dick Cheney feels sitting at the back of the bus?

    But I guess we've come a long way if being the first ever black Vice President is the same as sitting at the back of the bus.


    It's the paradigm... (none / 0) (#75)
    by DudeE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:16:58 AM EST
    ...Axelrod is no dummy.  An astute observer of the politics of expectations...

    ...the expectations...

    ...Clinton mathematically cannot win...
    ...Obama is therefore the presumptive nominee...

    all else follows; she's being divisive by staying in the race, she's being condescended by even believing that she could possibly win, et cetera...

    the strong-arming crap is expected from Republicans.  it's very distasteful coming from a Democrat.


    That's why Giuliani's the GOP nom, not McCain (none / 0) (#102)
    by Ellie on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:53:47 AM EST
    ... oh wait! I guess circumstances, and math, change pretty rapidly.

    ..Clinton mathematically cannot win...
    ...Obama is therefore the presumptive nominee...

    How does the saying go again? Don't count your chickens coming home to roost before the eggs are hatched. (I can never get it straight from Obama's speeches, since he tends to mangle the original message.)

    the strong-arming crap is expected from Republicans.  it's very distasteful coming from a Democrat.

    Absolutely. I'm just baffled at how many new ways these clowns can figure out not to count the votes. I wish they'd apply a fraction of that energy and creativity to resolving problems.

    This inverse fairness rule of disenfranchising millions while a handful of hyenas dicker over who gets the votes -- no matter who the voters actually chose -- is anti-democratic. It's embarrassing. It's tragic.

    People are losing homes, jobs, opportunities to dig themselves out of tragedy. They're sick and they're dying. I want to know how the Dems, and how the future President plan to help people -- me and my family -- deal with this.

    The remaining Dem candidates should be the LAST ones deciding how to divvy up the votes. Even if my preferred candidates weren't on the ballot, that wouldn't mean I'd automatically be for HRC OR Obama either, OR the loudest whiner between them.

    Think too of the impact on other candidates campaigns and their voters, and ahead to voters' representation in the party and in the GE.

    In closing, BAH!


    I see two Dem candidates still standing (none / 0) (#134)
    by Ellie on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 03:13:44 PM EST
    And a resolution. If TeamObama plans on gaming this beyond what they have already or prolonging his hissy fit, he'll just be hurting voters beyond his confirmed supporters and weakening his own candidacy.  

    As long as the (none / 0) (#120)
    by 0 politico on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:41:04 PM EST
    status quo favors his candidate.

    Frankly, my feeling is the Axelrod and company, as well as the DNC, have been dividing the party.  The HC campaign may have some blame, but most of it should go to Axelrod, J. Jackson Jr., and the devisive campaign they have run that allows for no critique of their candidate lest you be painted with some nasty brush.  Further, the DNC and Dean just seem to have miss managed this whole primary season.

    Regardless of your candidate, if you vote, your vote should count.  No one should tell you otherwise, nor tell you not to vote.


    I would be just as interested (none / 0) (#28)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:43:30 AM EST
    in how many would vote for Nader on either side

    Wouldn't Vote For Nader Under Any Circumstances (none / 0) (#33)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:48:18 AM EST
    but might consider the option of not voting for any presidential candidate depending on how things play out.

    I would only vote (none / 0) (#39)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:52:35 AM EST
    for him or any third party if there was a very solid chance of winning.
    I would never do it to make a statement and throw it  to the republican.  
    I actually think Nader might be a good or even great president.
    my problem has always been he has no chance.
    if Obama is the nominee I think his chances skyrocket.
    with this pastor stuff and other stuff, IMHO, Obama will not be president.
    if he is the nominee McCain will be president.  more right wing court appointments, more civil rights lost, more war.

    We need Ventura in this thing.... (none / 0) (#44)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:56:32 AM EST
    he'd make McCain's supposed "straight talk" look as crooked as a scoliosis-stricken spine.

    Think The Vids Of Rev. Wright Will Definitely (none / 0) (#49)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:00:44 AM EST
    defeat Obama if he is the nominee come November. He has been a member of that church for 20 years and I don't think he will be able to talk around the effects of Wright's rhetoric will have on a large segment of the population. Just think of how many groups were referenced, white people, Jews, victims of 9/11 etc. Obama already has problems with parts of the Dem base. The Republicans don't have to convince everyone. Just enough to make a difference.



    Those in the left wing Obama bubble... (none / 0) (#77)
    by DudeE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:18:38 AM EST
    ...clearly don't see the groundswell of Obama attacks coming from the right and right-of-center media.  Today's WSJ features "Obama and the Minister" - an unflattering portrait to say the least...

    We see them (none / 0) (#92)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:38:15 AM EST
    They will certainly have to be dealt with.  

    Some people in the HRC bubble seem to be under the misimpression that everything was dealt with in the 90s.  But you're dreaming if you think the GOP won't make much hay of Bill's pardoning of Marc Rich, his pardoning of FALN terrorists (allegedly at HRC's urging), his Kazakh mining lobbyist, HRC's records from her time as first lady, etc.  Not to mention the despicable rumors about her sexuality.

    Before you flame, please note that I am not saying that Obama is unassailable or that Clinton is actually dirty on any of these things.  I'm merely arguing that it is unrealistic to think that the Right has already thrown everything in its arsenal at Clinton.


    It's not that the scandals (none / 0) (#95)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:42:26 AM EST
    don't exist in Clinton's closet, it's that people do not care.  Get KO to do a week-long special on all the Clinton scandals and see how his ratings drop.

    Even if there are new kinks, people just don't care.  This is actually a case where being the hot new thing works against Obama.  All of his skeletons are new and exciting.


    You may not care (none / 0) (#96)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:44:35 AM EST
    And I don't either.   But I think you're wrong to say that nobody does.

    MO Blue (none / 0) (#89)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:32:11 AM EST
    I guess since you were able to mention it, it's all right:

    What do folks here think about those pastor videos, with "God d*mn America" and blaming 9-11 on the US?


    its the end (none / 0) (#94)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:40:39 AM EST
    thats what I think
    but the stuff that is circulating now is the tip of the iceberg.
    this has been saying this stuff for years and years.
    as I have said here before I have been getting these thing mailed to me for months.
    its not like its not out there it is just that only now is the media picking it up.
    and they ARE picking it up big time.  I really almost couldnt believe what I was hearing on MSNBC this morning.

    I've gotten a few of them (none / 0) (#97)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:45:06 AM EST
    but some of those statements turned my stomach.  Couple this with over 22K given to the church last year and...Jesus.

    I've got a cousin on his third deployment in Iraq.  He says those videos hit the military circuit about a week ago and have been forwarded around like crazy. (Yeah, funny how the US gov doesn't allow a lot of personal crap to be sent around, but they are letting these videos go through clean).  He says that the rhetoric is exactly the same of crap they hear in the streets and that no one in his unit would raise a finger to vote for Obama.  They'd rather spend 100 more years over there with McCain.  (Hyperbole, of course, but they are very, very angry)


    we are not supposed to (none / 0) (#104)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:55:15 AM EST
    be talking about this subject.
    just so you dont get yelled at.
    sort of understandable actually.  it is going to be talked about everywhere else though.

    I mentioned it before BTD said that the subject (none / 0) (#103)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:55:01 AM EST
    was off limits. Would not have made the comment if I knew Talk Left's restriction.

    woops (none / 0) (#110)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:07:38 PM EST
    thanks for letting me know.  I didn't know it was off limits.  Sorry!

    and when the dems lose the ge, whose (none / 0) (#72)
    by hellothere on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:15:52 AM EST
    fault will that be? it will be the democratic party. we elected them to represent us in congress with bush. they didn't. they were supposed to lead us throught the primaries. they haven't. this has been eye opening for me.

    Open Thread.... (none / 0) (#1)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:03:47 AM EST
    If I was on the hill for the Pirates yesterday, I would have put one in Billy Crystal's ear, showing him he has no business on a professional baseball diamond.

    I hope the Yankees never win another championship, and we can blame it on the Crystal Curse.  What an embarrassment.

    I hope they never win (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:14:31 AM EST
    another championship, too. Go Braves!

    Braves?.... (none / 0) (#10)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:16:51 AM EST
    I hope Tom Glavine keeps the form he had in his last start last season...the punk.

    Let's Go Mets!!!


    Heh (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:05:47 AM EST
    Kind of agree.

    I submitted my approval for any feasible (none / 0) (#7)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:14:10 AM EST
    plan, including the one proposed.

    Thanks (none / 0) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:15:42 AM EST
    I lead Jeralyn 1-0 so far!!

    I am not sure why Clinton supporters (none / 0) (#14)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:25:34 AM EST
    would oppose this. She is likely to win anyway. This is not a reflection on Obama. Florida's demographics favor Hillary.

     know why some  Obama supporters would oppose it- He doesn't need the publicity she would get from winning again.

    I do think he will improve his performance some- which may be why some Clinton supporters oppose this (no claim to know what is behind  JM's thinking). Some older voters are snowbirds and will not be here to vote. Presumably their ballots would be forwarded.  Obviously a real campaign here by Obama will give him some more support.

    I personally know two voters who are likely change their vote- one was a AA female Edwards voter, the other was a AA male Hillary voter. Ferraro in both cases did HRC in. Not sure how HRC apology went over. I suppose I should ask both today.

    The downside for me personally, I will have to take sides finally.

    No I will not reveal it here. I still intend to vote for the nominee.  


    If I were a Clinton supporter (none / 0) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:27:35 AM EST
    I would be DEMANDING a revote.

    It is clearly the best thing for her candidacy.


    I DEMAND A REVOTE!!!! (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:42:00 AM EST
    If you live in FL (none / 0) (#36)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:48:53 AM EST
    LEt them know.

    A Revote Is The Only Way For The Vote To (none / 0) (#29)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:45:23 AM EST
    be considered fair no matter which candidate a person prefers IMO.

    Some things are really more important than individual candidate preference and accurately counting every vote is one of them.


    I agree (none / 0) (#34)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:48:24 AM EST
    that is how it SHOULD be, but candidate supporters, a lot of them at least, are a different breed.

    I'm all for revotes... (none / 0) (#35)
    by sweetthings on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:48:48 AM EST
    But it simply can't be done without the support of the local politicians. In Michigan, it looks like the locals are working to make sure things get done. In Florida, they're doing just the opposite.

    I don't see what Clinton or Obama or even Dean can do as long as Florida democrats are determined to sit around and bicker rather than actually move forward on anything.


    i sent an email that they either need to (none / 0) (#76)
    by hellothere on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:17:05 AM EST
    seat the delegates or have a revote. either way the voters need to be heard and respected.

    This assumes (none / 0) (#23)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:40:10 AM EST
    that the Pirates have a pitcher who could actually put one there.  As a disgruntled Pirates fan, I would not bet money on that.

    I hear you.... (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:50:58 AM EST
    baseball needs to get on the ball and get a salary cap.  

    Teams like the Pirates shouldn't start at a competitive disadvantage year after year...it's not good for the game.


    it may be just tinfoil hattery (none / 0) (#90)
    by JJE on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:32:30 AM EST
    but in Pittsburgh many feel that management tries to keep the team just competitive/interesting enough to prevent a total fan revolt, but will never pay enough for the team to be truly competitive.  thus revenue-sharing keeps the enterprise profitable but ensures there will never be another pennant in the 'burgh.

    No tinfoil.... (none / 0) (#111)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:12:11 PM EST
    I think that's definitely the case with the Twins.

    If we had that salary cap, combined with the existing revenue sharing, the small-market owners would have less excuses for failing to compete.


    Well, (none / 0) (#57)
    by Boston Boomer on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:07:59 AM EST
    it's been a pretty long time since they did win a championship anyway.  As Red Sox fan, I find that very satisfying.

    Me too; but I'm a Padres fan. (none / 0) (#73)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:16:14 AM EST
    Satisfying for all non-members.... (none / 0) (#116)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:36:05 PM EST
    of the evil empire:)

    I can not pass up the chance to remind you that your squad is 0-1 lifetime against the real NY team:)


    Thanks from a Florida Democrat (none / 0) (#2)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:05:38 AM EST

    Wow! That press release (none / 0) (#4)
    by Joan in VA on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:08:15 AM EST
    doesn't seem obstructionist at all. Good for them! On to Michigan!

    '08 TED - U R there! (none / 0) (#5)
    by oldpro on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:08:33 AM EST
    ...take 18 minutes to watch this astonishing talk from Harvard-trained brain scientist Jill Bolte Taylor. It drew a huge standing ovation in the first session of the '08 TED conference and, by general consensus, counts as one of the most memorable TED talks of all time.

    (Hope this link works...sigh...)

    Superdelegates (none / 0) (#6)
    by cannondaddy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:10:27 AM EST
    are they breaking early?  Was Brokaw's "50 delegates" ready to declare for Obama a rumor?  Have the decided to trickle them out slowly?  

    I have no idea.  He's picked up eleven to Hillary's one since March 5.  My hunch is they will be close to tied in superdelegates before the Pennsylvania primary.

    FISA debate in the House (none / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:21:08 AM EST
    is closing.

    Keep us informed of what the Blue Dogs do (none / 0) (#13)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:24:42 AM EST
    Vote (none / 0) (#15)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:27:12 AM EST
    on ordering the previous question on the rule right now.

    I hope they get to agreeing to the House amendment to the Senate amendment before I have to hit the road for the afternoon.


    The previous question on the rule (none / 0) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:28:18 AM EST
    They clearly don't speak English in the Congress.

    They're voting (none / 0) (#18)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:29:14 AM EST
    on whether to vote to have a vote.

    The Senate isn't alone in this arcanity.


    The Previous Question is ordered (none / 0) (#37)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:50:20 AM EST
    Now on to adoption of the rule. This is a 15 minute vote. . . (yeah right)

    Adoption of which rule? (none / 0) (#58)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:08:00 AM EST
    Is this the vote, the real vote?

    Under the rule, Conyers (none / 0) (#62)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:11:08 AM EST
    is allowed to offer his amendment to strip immunity. He is opening that debate now.

    Ah (none / 0) (#65)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:13:06 AM EST
    NOW watch the Blue Dogs.

    Right (none / 0) (#67)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:14:15 AM EST
    word from mcjoan last night was that they were going to vote for it. We'll see.

    Jim Marshall on the floor (none / 0) (#85)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:28:59 AM EST
    wants a colloquy with Reyes and Conyers. Concerned about title II.

    Looks like he's trying to find a reason to vote yes.


    25% of Hillary supporters (none / 0) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:39:05 AM EST
    would vote for McCain

    Linked text

    10% of Obama supporters would.


    Experience vs Experiment (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:46:17 AM EST
    I'd say Obama is too experienced..... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:54:00 AM EST
    in shadyness and backroom wheeling and dealing.  Just like Hillary...and McCain.

    I'm voting for a Washington amatuer...be it Nader, Kubby, or Ventura.

    I really hope a Ventura/RFK Jr. ticket comes together...that would be sweet.


    what Ventura/RFK ticket (none / 0) (#71)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:15:39 AM EST
    Tell me more. I could go that way

    Nothing official.... (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:17:17 PM EST
    I think Ventura is still mulling it over, and supposedly he and RFK Jr. talked about running together as independents.  link

    I hope he is serious, and not just publicizing his new book.  He'd throw that wrench into the works!


    if RFK ever runs (none / 0) (#87)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:31:19 AM EST
    he better be on top of the ticket.  But I don't think he has any interest in running for President.  I still wish JFK jr had been a better pilot.  A JFK/RFK ticket...

    Why revote is necessary .. or the old should count (none / 0) (#45)
    by TalkRight on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:57:05 AM EST
    Many have made a case that Hillary would benefit so she should favor Or Obama would not benefit so he should oppose.. but I think the real reason is:

    Had this not been such a close contest it would not have mattered how they were seated.. but since it is a very close contest it becomes important that the results be a true representation of the peoples's actual vote.

    But what can anyone do about Florida's nine Democrats statement:

    "We thank and applaud our State Party Chairwoman Karen Thurman and her staff for their tireless work on this issue.... we do not believe that this is a realistic option at this time and remain opposed to a mail-in ballot election or any new primary election in Florida of any kind.

    Lambaste it (none / 0) (#46)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 10:59:38 AM EST
    and point to these 9 Dems as the obstacle to having Florida's votes count.

    May be they are trying to save Obama's skin? (none / 0) (#48)
    by TalkRight on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:00:16 AM EST
    and their own too.

    Doubtful. (none / 0) (#54)
    by sweetthings on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:05:32 AM EST
    Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz is Clinton superdelegate and campaign co-chair. Representatives Corrine Brown, Kendrick Meek, and Alcee Hastings are also Clinton superdelegates.

    Why would they be trying to throw the game to Obama?

    If they're marching on the orders of any national campaign, it's Hillary's. But I think it's more likely that they're pursuing some local or personal agenda.


    Can't For The Life Of Me Understand Why (none / 0) (#61)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:10:42 AM EST
    they would be doing this unless they are being bombarded by their constituents they need to be clamoring for a revote.

    Why would Clinton supporters... (none / 0) (#56)
    by zzyzx on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:07:55 AM EST
    ...be trying to save Obama's skin?

    Is is me or is a MI revote combined with FL being caught in the quagmire the worst case scenario for Clinton?  Obama has a good chance for winning MI which would eliminate her big states argument.  Even if he doesn't, he'll most likely make it close enough that there won't be a good popular vote or delegate count gain (at least based on recent polls).  Meanwhile the Florida election will remain questionable.


    It certainly looks that way to me... (none / 0) (#69)
    by sweetthings on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:15:35 AM EST
    The only way this makes sense to me is if the situation has simply moved beyond the control of the national players and is being driven entirely by the locals. A revote in MI coupled with nothing in Florida is the ultimate Hail Mary pass for Clinton. I can't imagine her taking that risk if she had any other option.

    My theory (none / 0) (#93)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:39:34 AM EST
    something is going on behind the scenes.  I think Obama's folks made it clear that a mail-in revote would be challenged at every step, and that they started planting seeds of corruption and stolen elections that have now spun out of control.  I listened to our local (Atlanta) urban radio station at the gym this morning and it was all about how mail-in voting disenfranchises aa voters, and all about how Clinton was desperate and using her position to push a situation where she could walk away with the nomination.  It got my heart rate up higher listening to the dj's than it did listening to Shakira.

    Can you imagine what a person like Jeremiah Wright would do with this charge of stolen elections?


    Not just Obama's folks... (none / 0) (#101)
    by sweetthings on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:52:20 AM EST
    Half the people screaming about mail-in voting have been Hillary's peeps.

    In a joint statement, they said they don't think the mail-in vote is ''a realistic option'' and they ``remain opposed to a mail-in ballot election or any new primary election in Florida of any kind.''

    Rep. Kendrick Meek, a Miami Democrat and key advisor to Clinton, called the proposal ''a disaster'' and said he thinks the Clinton camp shares his opinion.

    The Clinton campaign has signaled that it prefers a state-run conventional primary over a mail-in vote, but state party officials said the cost -- at least $25 million -- rules that out.

    I have a hard time seeing why Hillary would oppose a revote in Florida. But the fact is that most of the local politicians who are scorching this idea are Hillary supporters. So either something is going on and she's telling them to deep-six it for some reason that I can't fathom, or local politics have superseded their allegiance.

    I have to suspect the latter.


    Yes, its impossible that Hillary is up to (none / 0) (#105)
    by fuzzyone on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:55:16 AM EST
    something. It can't be that she is afraid she won't do as well in a revote and is playing brinksmanship hoping to get the delegates seated as is because she does not care that if she fails she will be harming the party's chances in the GE if Obama is the nominee.  No, it must be some grand, secret conspiracy that somehow Obama is making threats behind the scenes, which are causing Hillary's supporters to oppose the revote.  

    Do you see how absurd this is.  If Obama was making such threats why would Hillary not be screaming it from every rooftop.  I think both sides are being stupid about this.  Both candidates should immediately get behind this plan.


    Sorry (none / 0) (#47)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:00:10 AM EST
    This subject is not open to discussion, even in an Open Thread here.

    So am I no longer able to post? (none / 0) (#91)
    by Independence33 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:33:19 AM EST
    Is it possible to get an explanation for why I get deleted? Two days in a row I get deleted and the folks that I am replying to do not. I have been personally attacked several times including being called idiotic for just expressing my views. I hear complaints all the time about other sites and their horrible ways but every time I try to reply in a civil and decent tone I am deleted. I wonder if this happens on those other sites? Tek said in a completley off topic comment that I am "supposedly" intelligent because I beilive that some statements have been wrong in this campaign. The administrators deleted me for being off topic but somehow not the comment I was replying too. Today in an open thread I make a reply to Capt. Howdy because HE brought up the fact that 25% of Clinton supporters will not vote Democrat if Clinton is not the nominee. This is opposite to what has been pushed on this site and apparently I cant bring that up or the reasons I think this is happening.  

    Delete (none / 0) (#98)
    by 1jane on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:46:20 AM EST
    The arbritary deletions are stunning. Even a polite  comment is wiped away. Most sites ban profanity or flame throwing or trolling. Having served as a moderator for a national site for 2 years I enjoy the transparent agenda this site offers. You agree or get deleted. The site's bias is stunningly transparent.

    Um (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:18:49 PM EST
    Normally I would delete this comment as it is a personal attack on the site's adminstrators.

    But I leave it up to evidence your stunning lack of self awareness.

    We do not explain deletions as we make hundreds every day for a variety of reasons.

    That is all. If you do not like it, then find another site.


    Fair enough. You win Talk Left (none / 0) (#112)
    by Independence33 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:12:50 PM EST
    I still have yet to see an official announcement of the Talk Left bias. BTD even says he is supporting Obama, and commentor after commentor attacked Josh Marshall including the administrators for bias. Seems a little hypocritical to me to attck someone for percieved bias and not announce your own.

    This again (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:20:46 PM EST
    is evidence of stunning lack of self awareness.

    This comment violates, and in blatant fashion the site rules. You are attacking the site administrators in personal and nasty fashion.

    Yet you are aggrieved.

    We delete hundreds of comments each day in order to maintain civility at this site.

    We can no longer sit and explain each and every one.

    If you do not like it, find another site.


    Don't Make Accusations (none / 0) (#121)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:49:15 PM EST
    Of Hypocrisy without doing your homework. It makes you look like a very lazy and ungracious guest.

    TalkLeft is not a neutral site.


    TL has been clear about her positions regarding the candidates as has BTD.


    Okay (none / 0) (#124)
    by Independence33 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:13:02 PM EST
    If this statement is meant to claim that all neutrality is off limits then I apologize but I have looked at that and still see nothing that changes my point of view. These statements claim that this site is all about exposing injustices when it comes to constitutional law, but says nothing about its partisan leanings and def. its pro Clinton stance. If you are going to comment on a left leaning site about the politics of the day then you must understand that you will get some disagreement. That is why all the political threads are filled with comments and the more generic lefty threads are read and then put aside because pretty much everyone on here agrees. Examples like the gitmo post or getting mandatory minimum sentences banned are good because I think everyone agrees so there is no discussion. If you are going to throw your hat into the ring on this politics stuff then what do you expect? If you are going to voice your opinion and not fact then your readers will respond, not always in a positive way either. If this site is not neutral in this race then fine, but dont ridicule others that show their leanings occasionally themselves.

    I suggest (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:21:41 PM EST
    you find a site more to your liking.

    I personally have no use for your approach here.


    Thanks (none / 0) (#133)
    by Independence33 on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 02:24:55 PM EST
    Well since I am no longer welcome at this site I must say that I am really dissapointed. I really do enjoy this site and beilieve in the basic principals of all involved. I guess that I have been too adamant that the other point of view gets heard. Thats why I come here because it is another opinion instead of reaffirmation of mine. Most of my posts have been reactions to what others have said and not the administrators at all. When you get deleted for trying to make a reasonable,unoffensive argument maybe it makes you a little bitter and makes you a little accusatory. I really dont think anyone on here is a hypocrite.I just think that the arguments and deletion policy are a little one sided.Thanks for all the competitive banter over the last few months and soon I believe we all will be celebrating when the last remnants of a failed administration is run out of the White House and a new future for America will begin, regardless of who our nominee is. Its a great time to be a Democrat!

    I think Hillary should be making the rounds on TV (none / 0) (#60)
    by TalkRight on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:09:59 AM EST
    to let eveyone know that she is trying hard to get the Voters say count making a re-vote possible.

    The choice is between getting voters say count with some kind of re-vote (albeit not a perfect one) and not doing this at all!!! Which is worse?

    Makes sense... (none / 0) (#82)
    by sweetthings on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:24:53 AM EST
    Unless Hillary knows that a Florida revote isn't going to happen no matter how hard she pushes. If she's 100% certain that Nelson and Wasserman aren't ever going to agree on a method, then she's better off not investing any energy into that fight, and just continuing to push the 'seat the initial delegates' plan.

    The biggest danger scenario for Hillary (none / 0) (#70)
    by TalkRight on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:15:38 AM EST
    MI - revotes.. FL - split

    If Obama gets close to Hillary in MI - there by:

    1. Questioning the Old vote results in Florida
    2. Questiong the arguments of FL/MI (big states) for Hillary.

    This sounds like a well thought out plan (none / 0) (#106)
    by fuzzyone on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 11:56:04 AM EST
    and, as an Obama supporter and contributor I am going to email him and urge him to support it.

    Revote (none / 0) (#114)
    by Stash on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 12:25:06 PM EST
    I think the outlined process is acceptable.

    With that said, I think the Florida Democratic Party needs to start hold State-wide caucuses.  This is a great and necessary excercise in party building and an opportunity for Democrats to gather and discuss their local, state, and national Platforms.

    But, the real opportunity is to never be hostage to a Republican controlled legislature again.  If the Republican controlled legislature chooses to violate the Party's rules again, the State Party can then use the "already scheduled, already practiced, already expected caucuses" to take back control of their party.

    Just emailed my mom... (none / 0) (#123)
    by kredwyn on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:08:37 PM EST
    She's a Dem voter in Fla who is currently pretty pissed at the DNC. Sent her the memos/press releases as well as the link to voice her opinion.

    The FlaDem site is about to get an earful from her...

    Lots of registered voters are about to start getting more mobile re: travel, a mail-in ballot may be problematic if they receive it while in NY or MI or TX and can't get back to deliver the thing to a drop-off location.

    Another Florida Democrat here (none / 0) (#129)
    by Sinfonian on Fri Mar 14, 2008 at 01:47:58 PM EST
    I have been puzzled by the opposition of our U.S. House Democratic delegation to a revote.  I certainly don't see a mail-in or hybrid process (the FDP's proposal is a hybrid) as unfair, or as disenfranchising anyone; surely not having a revote at all constitutes greater disenfranchisement than the revote proposal.

    I appreciate the heads-up on this.  I will be letting the FDP know that I strongly favor a revote, and I am recommending that others in Florida do the same.