Jimmy Carter: Florida, Michigan Shouldn't Count

AP:

ormer President Jimmy Carter says delegates from Florida and Michigan should not be counted at the Democratic National Convention because they "disqualified themselves."

On "The Tonight Show" Wednesday, Carter also warned of a disaster if party insiders try to wrest the nomination from the candidate with the largest number of votes and state victories.

"It would be a catastrophe for the party," Carter told Jay Leno.

Read the whole story: AP

Comments

[Raymondf]

10:27 AM on 05/09/2008

Bet if he had won the Florida and Michigan primaries he would be singing a different tune, we have 50 states, and two territories, not 48 states, and two territories.

[Raymondf]

10:24 AM on 05/09/2008

No it hasn't

[exotic]

09:16 AM on 05/09/2008

As one who voted in Fl, we were broadcasted to all over the media that our vote did not count. Now, since Hillary wants to change the rules, it counts. Pure BS.

Love you Jimmy Carter!

Obama/Hagel/or Paul

[pahprd]

12:20 AM on 05/09/2008

Will at least one Obama supporter please tell me how they justify Obama actively sabotaging the revotes in Michigan and Florida? I can understand why you think it is unfair to count the votes as is, but when Clinton agreed to a revote, Obama and his people aggressively killed any chance for revotes. This is extremely offensive to me, and the number one reason why he will never get my vote. I actually had respect for him once. Not anymore. But I am very curious to hear at least one Obama supporter explain how they can overlook this. Please. I am listening.

[EspressoAtNoon]

12:35 AM on 05/09/2008

The idea of changing the rules in the fourth quarter to help one candidates to desperately gain ground?

Point is: when you have a competition, the players need to agree on the rules before the competition begins. Hillary was HAPPY to sign off on denying Michigan votes because the state had violated DNC rules. Every other candidate did the same. Those were the rules to this competition - and Michigan's local politicians were to blame for violating the national party guidelines.

Only when it was impossible for Hillary to win with the states left on the board did she give a shit about Michigan. And someone had to pay for a new election. And since the rules were established upfront and a clear winner has emerged based on those rules, why would anybody, but the loser want to change the rules in the fourth quarter to try and overturn the other candidate's victory?

The irony is: Hillary claims to care so much about getting the votes of the people to count (Michigan and Florida). She can't win a majority of earned delegate votes, popular votes, or states even if she is given Michigan and Florida. So her ONLY way to victory is to get the Superdelegates to overturn the votes of the people and hand her the nomination. Do you see the irony? She wants Michigan votes to count at which point she will desperately try and have all the peoples' votes overturned by the Democratic "Elite".

[EspressoAtNoon]

12:41 AM on 05/09/2008

The idea of changing the rules in the fourth quarter to help one candidates to desperately gain ground?

Point is: when you have a competition, the players need to agree on the rules before the competition begins. Hillary was HAPPY to sign off on denying Michigan votes because the state had violated DNC rules. Every other candidate did the same. Those were the rules to this competition - and Michigan's local politicians were to blame for violating the national party guidelines.

Only when it was impossible for Hillary to win with the states left on the board did she give a s#@t about Michigan. And someone had to pay for a new election. And since the rules were established upfront and a clear winner has emerged based on those rules, why would anybody, but the loser want to change the rules in the fourth quarter to try and overturn the other candidate's victory?

The irony is: Hillary claims to care so much about getting the votes of the people to count (Michigan and Florida). She can't win a majority of earned delegate votes, popular votes, or states even if she is given Michigan and Florida. So her ONLY way to victory is to get the Superdelegates to overturn the votes of the people and hand her the nomination. Do you see the irony? She wants Michigan votes to count at which point she will desperately try and have all the peoples' votes overturned by the Democratic "Elite".

[Raymondf]

10:35 AM on 05/09/2008

Obama steals primary, but not General, because Florida, and Michigan votes will count in the general election, and most are mad at democratic party. So who do you think they will vote for.

[NoSillyName]

10:43 PM on 05/08/2008

Carter is correct. Everyone signed off on the MI and FL NOT counting, including HRC. Now that she's losing, she wants to change the rules.

[ohiomark]

10:52 PM on 05/08/2008

So the voters of Florida and Michigan should just have their votes flushed down the toilet because the Democrat Party says so?

....and you thought Republicans were stealing elections.

[condew]

11:10 PM on 05/08/2008

The voters of Florida and Michigan should place their anger squarely on those wh deserve it, the Democratic leadership in those two states who sold out their citizens for a chance at a few more hotel rooms being rented.

Florida and Michigan tried to cheat, they lost their representation, they deserve nothing.

[NoSillyName]

02:21 AM on 05/09/2008

ohiomark, no they shouldn't, but both candidates signed off on it. Obama withdrew his name from the MI ballot. HRC didn't and she was the only one to campaign in FL all the while knowing that whatever votes she got as the only one on the ballot were not going to count. She shouldn't have signed the agreement if she didn't intend to keep her word. Of course, she didn't think she'd need MI & FL because she expected to be coronated on Super Tuesday 1. Now she wants to change the agreement because she's losing.

Actually the Republicans are responsible for this mess. The moving up of the date for the primary was attached to some reform bill that passed, but the earlier date was against the rules. Apparently punishment was needed so other states didn't start changing their primary dates earlier and earlier, etc. and blah blah blah.

[bossmechanic]

09:59 PM on 05/08/2008

Jimmy's just another great example of the stellar demo leadership "best and brightest" - right up there with Dean, Pelosi and Reid. Ideally, the demo dream teams will keep sharing their wisdom with the unwashed masses. The more they talk, the more likely normal americans will realize how mentally bankrupt the demo party really is.

[condew]

11:13 PM on 05/08/2008

"Jimmy" is the real deal, a compassionate man who takes his religeon seriously. The world could use a dozen more like him.

He is what Bush pretended to be.

[ohiomark]

09:31 PM on 05/08/2008

We are supposed to believe that Jimma is a good judge of a foreign election (Venezuela) when he won't even allow votes to count from 2 of our biggest states.

His credibility already sucks, this doesn't help.

[condew]

11:16 PM on 05/08/2008

He believes you cheat, you pay the consequences.

If we don't enforce to the rules, the primaries for 2012 will begin in 2009.

[ohiomark]

08:20 AM on 05/09/2008

The voters don't set the "rules" of the Democrat Party. Just like the voters don't control the "superdelegates" who can override their votes as well if they deem them incorrect.

[Average]

08:25 PM on 05/08/2008

Poor old Jimmy. Still TRYING to be relevant when he NEVER WAS RELEVANT even when he was president.

[Zhonni]

08:52 PM on 05/08/2008

What makes you think he is irrelevant?

If he is irrelevant, what does that make you? Afterall, you were never president.

GO KICK ROCKS!

[condew]

11:17 PM on 05/08/2008

He will always be relevant. He's a rare thing these days, a senior statesman who didn't sell out.

[Average]

08:32 AM on 05/09/2008

Sorry, but I was an adult when Carter was President--even voted for him ONCE.. NOBODY thougfht he was relevant back then. He is still NOT relevant.

[Truthfighter1]

12:54 PM on 05/08/2008

Check out latest news on cnn.com Political Ticker. Clinton supporter Harvey Weinstein threating the DNC with Funds.

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Hillary Clinton supporter Harvey Weinstein threatened to cut off contributions to congressional Democrats unless House Speaker Nancy Pelosi embraced his plan to finance revotes in Florida and Michigan, three officials familiar with their conversation said.

The more this goes on the more Obama looks better and better, his notion of Washington needs a change looks more and more better every day when you have Hillary pandering gas tax cuts and her main money fund raiser trying to bully the DNC trying to buy the nomination. What the hell is going on here??

[Startreklivz]

12:50 PM on 05/08/2008

President Carter is right of course (and I'm a Michigander, whose delegation would not be seated).

The Party Poo-Bahs (most of whom were also Hillary Clinton for President campaign members/chairs) wanted to enhance the coronation of Hillary, so moved up the primary. They had no idea that Hillary would not waltz to victory, and if Michigan had stuck to the schedule, Michigan could have had a real voice in deciding who the nominee would be.

The idiots deserve what they brought onto themselves.

[DesertLight]

12:36 PM on 05/08/2008

Why can't this guy just shut his big fat yapper?

[condew]

11:21 PM on 05/08/2008

Why can't Hillary Clinton stop destroying our future? Why can't McCain seek 100 years of peace?

It's good to hear honest men like Carter and Obama. It's good to hear what integrity sounds like again.

[Relax08]

12:33 PM on 05/08/2008

This doesn't help either. Why can't we all just get along.

[una4dable]

12:30 PM on 05/08/2008

If we are going to truly change the way Washington politics being played then why not start now. I don't think we should be teaching our children(tomorrow's leaders) that when it doesn't look like you are going to win the game, you just keep changing the rules unto you do. The rules were broken CASE CLOSED. When my children are disobedient they are punished, and if I don't hold through with that punishment then I look weak. Dems we are looking weak right now.

[Relax08]

12:36 PM on 05/08/2008

This is really sad because if Hillary had not gone down this route of reinforcing the thought that this was an improper disenfranchisement of voters as her road to victory, this would be a much easier problem to fix. It is really sad that she actually signed a pledge not to count this votes and now irrationally suggests that there should be no consequence for these states' party's action. I think they should seat the Michigan delegates as now suggested but with no super delegates- since they are the idiots who did this in the first place and as to Florida they should seat them all but only give them 1/2 their value.

This whole mess makes the Democratic Party look incapable of governing.

[olivia]

01:00 PM on 05/08/2008

And once again, we can thank Hillary for this. Why does she hate the Democratic party so much?

[Skeptiqone]

12:25 PM on 05/08/2008

If Michigan and Florida votes count...then what will happen in 2012? If every state decides to move up to New Hampshire dates, it will be impossible to stop them. Maybe a national primary in January is fine, but remember it takes many qualified candidates a long time to introduce themselves to the public. We could end up with a situation where only the well connected or super rich will be able to compete. It is unfortunate, but we really have to think of the chaos the inclusion of the Michigan and Florida votes may create.

[08timefortruth]

12:24 PM on 05/08/2008

Did no one read the other article about MI working on a compromise to seat their delegates? Maybe you should.