You are correct that she only said the Michigan primary would not count. However that was the only one she was asked about. It's reasonable to assume that she would have said the same about Florida had she been asked.

No, it's not.  Again, you just can't discuss rules and rules violations on this level of generality where an approval of one thing signifies an approval of something else.  Those are two entirely different cases.  Clinton only said a few words on the subject.  It's not reasonable and it's certainly not fair to read something into those words that she absolutely did not say and then go about claiming that she said the thing you read into them.  Really, it's not even a borderline case, it's just not fair.

Again, I was wrong to include Florida in her statement. But I don't see how my inference is wrong. Do you really think, that after saying that Michigan wouldn't count, that if she had asked about Florida, she would have said that Florida should count? I can't see that.

The time to protest the situation was before the primaries were held; not afterward, when it was clear that doing so would be to her advantage.

Why?  Where's that rule?  My understanding is that the candidates are free to do and say whatever they wish whenever they wish.  And generally speaking, they're a little busy campaigning in the state they're running in right now than to go haring off after issues involving states at some later part of the calendar.

Of course the candidates can say and do what they wish. But if I can make an analogy without you thinking that I am comparing Hillary to Bush, a lot of the damage that Bush as done to the country is because he's said that the rules (in this case the laws) don't apply to him.

That's also the reason that the Constitution forbids ex post facto laws.

In 2000, Al Gore never made the claim that because he got more popular votes nationwide that he should be declared the winner. Why? Because that would be changing the rules in the middle of the contest.

How did Bush get declared the winner in Florida? Because the Supreme Court changed the rules during the contest. Florida state law had very clear procedures on how to contest an election and what the standard should be for counting (or not counting) problematical ballots. Gore followed those procedures (that was why he only disputed three counties, because that was what the law stipulated) to the letter. The Supreme Court overruled the law.

I know that DNC rules don't rise to the level of the law or the Constitution. But the rules were set before Florida and Michigan changed the date of their primaries, before it was known what states, if any, would move their primary date, and which candidate it would help or hurt. To the extent that the Republicans were responsible for the date changes, the voters should hold them to account.

I think the argument that Hillary was too busy to worry about Michigan and Florida doesn't hold water. Someone who aspires to be President should be able to see the big picture. Her apparent plan was to overwhelm the competition on Super Tuesday, and after that didn't happen, she's floundered ever since, changing her message, her tactics, and her strategy.

"Whereas blah blah blah

THEREFORE, I _____, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge
I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential
election primary or caucus  before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa,
Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as "campaigning" is defined by
rules and regulations of the DNC."

And an audio  of an interview in which Hillary states of the Michigan primary, "Its clear, this election they are having is not going to count for anything." The passage in question is twenty to twenty minutes into the recording it's worth listening to the whole thing for context.

In my view, if she had felt it was wrong, as she says it is now, she should have voiced it well before the disputed primaries were held, when it could have made a difference; she certainly shouldn't have signed a pledge or made statements affirming the DNC's rules and calendar.

My husband picked up the phone instead of me and it turned out to be a pushpoll. He had been torn between Hillary and Obama.   The fellow asked him if he'd be willing to be po