DNC Official: Delegates Won\'t Be Seated Without Revote

DNC Official: Delegates Won't Be Seated Without Revote

Boston Globe   |  Brian Mooney   |   March 20, 2008 09:02 AM


stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

Unless Florida and Michigan Democrats devise workable plans to redo their outlaw primaries, there is no chance the national party will yield to pressure and approve their delegates if it could tip the outcome of the Democratic presidential race, a potential key arbiter of the dispute said yesterday.

James Roosevelt Jr. of Massachusetts, cochairman of the Democratic National Committee's rules and bylaws committee, said in an interview with the Globe that he doubts there will be a resolution of the standoff without the states devising do-over contests to be held before June 10.


 
 

Comments
29
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

Some posters are just amazing. Post away about RULES and breaking rules, and changing rules, when you don't even know what the rules are.

When ALL parties agreed to strip FL and MI of their delegates, ALL parties also agreed that a revote would be possible to select legitimate delegates for the convention.

Asking now for a revote does not break any rules at all. It's plain and simple.

Here is Howard Dean's statement on the RULES

Dean's full statement:

"We're glad to hear that the Governors of Michigan and Florida are willing to lend their weight to help resolve this issue. As we've said all along, we strongly encourage the Michigan and Florida state parties to follow the rules, so today's public overtures are good news. The rules, which were agreed to by the full DNC including representatives from Florida and Michigan over 18 months ago, allow for two options. First, either state can choose to resubmit a plan and run a party process to select delegates to the convention; second, they can wait until this summer and appeal to the Convention Credentials Committee, which determines and resolves any outstanding questions about the seating of delegates. We look forward to receiving their proposals should they decide to submit new delegate selection plans and will review those plans at that time. The Democratic Nominee will be determined in accordance with party rules, and out of respect for the presidential campaigns and the states that did not violate party rules, we are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game.


    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:05 AM on 03/21/2008

Obama needs to push for caucuses in MI and FL. If Hillary opposes the idea then she'll be exposed as the liar she is. If she agrees then she'll have to suffer the crushing loss of both states. Win - win for Obama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 PM on 03/20/2008

He wants caucuses because they won't have an impact on the popular vote totals. He plays like a Republican. I must say that it is really difficult to see how Obama's claim that he is a uniter has any substance. Millions of voters are being treated very badly. He won't even sit down at the table to negotiate how to fairly handle this. It's his way, or no way. I know half the democratic party is noticing these critical flaws in him. The now divided party, now that Obama is playing like a Republican.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:44 AM on 03/21/2008

HE OFFERED HERE THIS SHE SAID NO!!! SHE STATED IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO THE VOTERS BECAUSE THE CANNOT GET OFF FROM WORK!!! LOL

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:30 PM on 03/20/2008

Following your own rules, I would say that is the very definition of integrity.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:00 PM on 03/20/2008

Obviously

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:54 PM on 03/20/2008

Without re-votes in MI and FL Hillary's chances of winning the nomination just went from slim to none... This is very bad news for Hillary supporters - and, despite her best attempts to make Obama look like the person keeping re-votes from moving forward, those decisions were made unanimously by democrat party officials and state law makers in both states. I'm glad Im not a Clinton donor, you might as well play the lottery...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:41 PM on 03/20/2008

You must not want the Democrats to win in November either. Not fixing the MI/FL problem insults the voters and campaign workers in both states. In order for the Dems to win in November, they have to win at least one, and probably both of these states. MI has been a very close blue state the past 2 elections and FL voted blue in 2000, although its votes were counted red. If this isn't fixed to the satisfaction of FL and MI voters, enough will not vote, or vote Nader, that the Republicans will win both states.

It doesn't matter whose fault it is this happened. It must be fixed if the Dems are to win in November.

And Hillary and Obama should personally sit down and fix it, without divisive, oneupsmanship, fiddle-while-Rome-burns-self-serving staff. They each want the Presidential -- ACT PRESIDENTIAL AND FIX THIS. If they can't or won't, they'd be crappy Presidents anyway and the Convention should select another.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 AM on 03/21/2008

Florida and Michigan had a very long time to address their delegates. They chose not to. Hillary and Barack SIGNED AGREEMENTS saying they would not campaign or participate in elections in Florida and Michigan. Is anyone posting those SIGNED AGREEMENTS? Does Hillary have no integrity? She publicly says they do not count in October but now desperately wants a "redo" because she needs the votes? This is the problem with Hillary, she wants to rewrite every rule only if it is benefical to her. This is the Nevada caucus lawsuit, this is caucus' in general, this is the only big states count Clinton approach. New Clinton rules every single day. She attacked her NY Senate opponent when he didn't provide his tax returns but she won't supply the last eight years worth. New Clinton rules every single day.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:34 PM on 03/20/2008

Sloane, you did ask one stupid question- "does Hillary have no integrity?"

As for the caucuses, I am surprised that she managed to get those delegates from Iowa at the convention. If they had any integrity, they would have questioned why Hillary was dissing the caucuses and Iowa's right to go first. But, then again, they probably know that Hillary will do anything to win, and love her for it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:55 PM on 03/20/2008

You're so right. I believe Obama did add votes from the Iowa caucus but it's still surprising they didn't take them all from her. If you read a couple of the pro-Hillary sites, you would never want her, her supporters are shocking to say the least.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:14 PM on 03/20/2008

Good.


And that doesn't mean I don't want those voters heard - I ABSOLUTELY DO.


I say "good" because this is a matter of responsibility... On a pretty adolescent level. The states were told there would be consequences for breaking the rules. They broke them anyway, and then acted like the consequences were a surprise. Anyone who's spent time with children knows this pattern well.


The DNC has now made it clear that it's 100% the states' responsibility to make it right. And again, if they choose not to, there will be consequences; The delegates won't be be seated. And the voters in FL and MI states will have absolutely no one to blame but their own legislators.


It's unfortunate and pathetic that the DNC has to step into the role of disciplinary parent. Hopefully in the future, all state leaders will act like adults, and it won't happen again.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:06 PM on 03/20/2008

GOOD!!!!! Hillary doesn't get to change the rules in the middle of the game to suit her, even if she is married to Bill Clinton! Hey, Hill, if you're so damn interested in franchising the voters in Mi and FLA, you should have spoken up when the DNC made its decision, rather than agree to it. The Clinton camp is desperate AND pathetic!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:28 PM on 03/20/2008

greejam, don't get too excited. They still have plenty of time. They hired a new pollster recently, and soon a new Hillary will emerge.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:58 PM on 03/20/2008

How many Hillarys are there? Do they plan on listing each one on the ballot?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:11 PM on 03/20/2008

Sybil is scaring me. A new Hillary for each desperate tactic.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:10 PM on 03/20/2008

I've been watching the various blogs on this. It's clear, at least on these blogs, that the partisans of Obama and Clinton can't see the forest through the trees and are both trying to rearrange the furniture on the Titanic.

Clinton and Obama are running for President in the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party and the state parties have created a potential calamity for November, if MI and FL are not resolved to everyone's satisfaction..

If these two are worth consideration as President, the 2 of them have to sit down and carve out a fair result for the voters of FL and MI and the campaign workers from FL and MI -- without any divisive staff in the room. If they can't fix a calamity among their allies, when in the long term they're on the same team, neither is worthy of being President.

In that case, the Convention should select someone else for President and stiff both of them.

Al Gore?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 AM on 03/20/2008

The calamity, as you call it, was the sole creation of HRC. The DNC made the decision and Hillary pledged to abide by that decision. Now she has decided that she' taking the "moral high ground" by contesting the DNC decision? That is not the "moral high ground," it is a desparate attempt to get more pledged delegates. How uneducated are these Clintonites that they are not embarrassed by the unending triangulation and lies? I would curb the talk of electability with the repubs working double time to help her get the nomination - because they think they can whip her a$$.

This is not a blood sport. We should be able to run civilized campaigns with the emphasis on character, integrity and a sense of fair play. I know, that really is a fairy tale.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:23 PM on 03/20/2008

IF this isn't resolved, neither Hillary nor Obama is electable or deserve to be elected. I don't care if both, one or neither is the culprit. They are running for President and can fix it. Failure to fix it = John McCain as President in November, whichever one wins the nomination. Nader will also get a much larger percentage of the vote, and deservedly so.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:15 AM on 03/21/2008

If you say so. I'm pretty sure the DNC is reading the board and looking for some sage advice.

The DNC made the rulings. I wish I had been as lucky as you were since you must have been there to witness the discussions that led to getting the candidates to agree. I'm thinking they all were thinking that the threat would cause the states to abandon plans to move their voting date up to January.

My guess is that the candidates are getting flooded with requests from the voters in both states to please do whatever they can to get their votes counted and delegates seated. I want a president who responds to the people.

Obama refuses to sit down and negotiate a fair and reasonable resolution. It's his way, or no way. I don't want a president who ignores the people.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:54 AM on 03/21/2008

blame the state party leaders they didn't follow the rules and hillary should abide by her earlier decision.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:12 AM on 03/21/2008

The DNC is 100% correct. The FL & MI Party bosses that decided they would break the rules by holding the unsanctioned primary date vote knew exactly what the penalties were going to be.

The Voters in those states knew that their delegates would not be seated if the date for primary voting was not not changed.

Even the Candidates themselves knew and approved of the DNC's ruling and signed documents stting that the understood what the rules would be.

Now one of your Dem candidates & its campaign surrogates start a propoganda war against your DNC chairman & the DNC itself. This same candidate endorsed a Republican nominee over one of their own party members as being better qualified as Commander in Chief. ROFLMAO.

I assure you come the General Mrs Clinton will not win. Joint ticket? Her name, history & negatives will doom any chances for the Dems to win... What a mess. Best get out & have BOTH Dem candidates endorse, support and campaign for your States Senate & Congressional seats for this 08.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:36 AM on 03/20/2008

clinton has said that it won't accept a caucus in Michigan, so I don't see where it has taken the moral high ground on getting the MI delegates involved.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 03/20/2008

Caucus states don't conclude with a popular vote count. We already have enough states using that method and throwing off the accuracy of who's ahead in the popular vote. The media, and the superdelegates are making a big deal out of that particular element. FL and MI are not caucus states. Their people have never done them. Obama will be fine with Hillary winning the states in caucus, but he doesn't want her vote count to go above his. In other words, he doesn't care if he wins fair, he just wants to win. He calls himself the Uniter (just like GWB), but he has sliced the party in half.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 AM on 03/21/2008

PRESS RELEASE from the Michigan Democratic Party
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 1, 2007
Contact: Jason Moon

LANSING " In response to numerous inquiries from the press and others concerning the date of the 2008 Michigan Democratic Party (MDP) Presidential Caucus, MDP Chair Mark Brewer made the following statement today.

"I have consulted with Michigan Democratic leaders and the consensus is that the MDP will hold its Caucus on Saturday, February 9, 2008 provided all other states abide by the DNC scheduling rules," Brewer said. "There is also a consensus among our leaders that if any state schedules its caucus or primary in violation of the DNC"s rules, Michigan will move its Caucus to an earlier date. That earlier date may be on or before the date of the offending state"s caucus or primary."


As can be clearly seen from the above press release, Michigan originally intended to hold a caucus. Only after Florida passed its primary law changing its date did Michigan go to a primary. The primary was originally set for Jan 29 but was moved to Jan 15.

There is absolutely no reason Michigan, or Florida for that matter, could not hold a state caucus.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 AM on 03/21/2008

Independent, you refer to clinton as an "it". You must be referring to Colbert's version of Hillary- the one created by focus groups and consultants.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 PM on 03/20/2008

This gives me hope for the future of the Democratic Party.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 AM on 03/20/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 
 

 

 Site  Web ask.com