Florida, Michigan cannot save Clinton

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Florida, Michigan cannot save Clinton stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

NEDRA PICKLER | May 16, 2008 10:06 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., walks from her campaign plane on the tarmac in Rapid City, South Dakota Thursday, May 15, 2008. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola)

WASHINGTON — Michigan and Florida alone can't save Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign.

Interviews with those considering how to handle the two states' banished convention delegates found little interest in the former first lady's best-case scenario. Her position, part of a formidable comeback challenge, is that all the delegates be seated in accordance with their disputed primaries.

Even if they were, it wouldn't erase Barack Obama's growing lead in delegates.

The Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee, a 30-member panel charged with interpreting and enforcing party rules, is to meet May 31 to consider how to handle Michigan and Florida's 368 delegates _ both pledged delegates and superdelegates.

Last year, the panel imposed the harshest punishment it could render against the two states after they scheduled primaries in January, even though they were instructed not to vote until Feb. 5 or later. Michigan and Florida lost all their delegates to the national convention, and all the Democratic candidates agreed not to campaign in the two states, stripping them of all the influence they were trying to build by voting early.

But now there is agreement on all sides that at least some of the delegates should be restored in a gesture of party unity and respect to voters in two general election battlegrounds.

Clinton has been arguing for full reinstatement, which would boost her standing. She won both states, even though they didn't count toward the nomination and neither candidate campaigned in them. Obama even had his name pulled from Michigan's ballot.

The Associated Press interviewed a third of the panel members and several other Democrats involved in the negotiations and found widespread agreement that the states must be punished for stepping out of line. If not, many members say, other states will do the same thing in four years.

Story continues below

"We certainly want to be fair to both candidates, and we want to be sure that we are fair to the 48 states who abided by the rules," said Democratic National Committee Secretary Alice Germond, a panel member unaligned with either candidate. "We don't want absolute chaos for 2012.

"We want to reach out to Michigan and Florida and seat some group of delegates in some manner, at least most of us do. These are two critical states for the general (election) and the voters of those states who were not the people who caused this awful conundrum to occur deserve our attention and deserve to be a part of our process and deserve to be at the convention," she said.

Just as Democrats across the country have been divided over which candidate would make the better nominee, most of the panel members also bring personal preferences to the table.

Many are long-standing party officials with close ties to the Clintons. The former first lady has 13 members publicly supporting her, including campaign advisers Harold Ickes and Tina Flournoy who are working to build her delegate count. Eight are openly aligned with Obama. Nine others are officially undeclared.

"We have to have delegates, and they have to be delegations that reflect the opinions of those two states," said former DNC Chairman Don Fowler, a committee member supporting Clinton. "How we get there is very different because everyone sees these questions of who it helps and who it hurts. I don't think the formulation has been found that will get around the piece at this point." But he said a solution is probably possible among the diverse interests.

Because Obama is in the lead for the nomination, his camp heads into the meeting in a position of strength. It is possible the Illinois senator could clinch the nomination by the time the panel meets if he picks up the pace of superdelegate endorsements in the coming weeks.

But Obama has such a lead that he may be able to afford to be generous and give Clinton most of the delegates. That would help put the issue behind them and help him build goodwill in Michigan and Florida heading into the November election.

Still, some think the fairest solution is to disregard the primary votes and split the delegations evenly between the two candidates. Yvonne Gates, a member of Nevada who said she is keeping her candidate preference private until after the meeting so her decision won't be questioned, said she isn't sure what position she would support at the meeting but that it must be fair to both candidates.

"My definition is a 50-50 split is something that is fair," she said. "It cannot be a situation where you give one candidate more votes than the other. In my opinion that wasn't an election when they didn't have a chance to get out and talk to the people of that community."

It's also possible that any vote that recognizes the Michigan and Florida results would legitimize their elections. Clinton has been arguing that she leads in the popular vote, but that's only when both states are included and it is very slim _ fewer than 5,000 votes out of 34 million cast.

Her accounting also doesn't include some caucus states that favored Obama and where the popular vote wasn't tallied. The measure of winning the nomination is not the popular vote but whoever can get the majority of delegates _ currently 2,026 are needed for the nomination although adding Michigan and Florida back in would change the threshold.

Obama climbed to 1,904 on Friday, according to The Associated Press count. Clinton has 1,719 delegates and is trying to use the popular vote argument to win over more.

Clinton encouraged supporters in an e-mail Friday to sign a message to the DNC asking them to count Michigan and Florida in the May 31 meeting. "I need you to remind them that in the Democratic Party, we count every vote," her e-mail said.

Fourteen of Clinton's Hispanic supporters in Congress sent a letter to the Rules and Bylaws Committee Friday arguing that disregarding the votes cast by Hispanics, 12 percent of the primary vote in Florida, could damage the nominee.

So far, Obama's campaign has not been giving direction publicly or privately to panel members. The Clinton campaign's official position has been full reinstatement, but her advisers acknowledge they are considering an idea before the panel to seat the delegates with half a vote each. Clinton campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press" that they "certainly might" accept a compromise to seat half the delegates.

If their elections had been held according to party rules, Michigan and Florida would have allocated a total of 313 pledged delegates based on the outcome of the vote.

Using the results of the January elections with no votes for Obama from Michigan, Clinton would get 178 to Obama's 67, with the remainder in Michigan who voted "uncommitted" and giving her a 111-vote advantage. The remainder of the 368 delegates includes those representing the "uncommitted" vote in Michigan and John Edwards in Florida, along with superdelegates.

As of Friday, she was behind 185 delegates, so that would not catch her up even under that unlikely scenario.

The plans before the committee will be more generous to Obama. The Michigan Democratic Party has proposed giving 69 of its 128 delegates to Clinton and 59 to Obama, an advantage of 10 delegates for Clinton.

A proposal from Florida would halve its 185 delegates. From that, Clinton would get 52.5 and Obama 33.5, a 19-delegate advantage for Clinton.

"I think it's a reasonable solution to the problem that was created, and my hope is that we'll be able to get past this and move on," said Allan Katz, an Obama supporter who serves on the panel but won't be able to vote on any Florida solution because he is from the state.

The committee is not bound to select the proposals offered and has authority to reinstate any number of delegates and divide them in any way.

An open question is how to handle the other type of delegates each state lost _ the superdelegates who are party leaders not bound by the outcome of the vote and are free to support whatever candidate they personally choose. Michigan has 29 superdelegates, and Florida 26. A total of nine have declared for Obama, 15 for Clinton and the rest are undeclared.

___

On the Net:

Democratic National Committee: http://www.democrats.org

WASHINGTON — Michigan and Florida alone can't save Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign. Interviews with those considering how to handle the two states' banished convention delegates found little ...
WASHINGTON — Michigan and Florida alone can't save Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign. Interviews with those considering how to handle the two states' banished convention delegates found little ...
Filed by Will Thomas  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
713
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

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:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (9 pages total)
- JMorgan I'm a Fan of JMorgan 3 fans permalink

If FL and MI delegations are seated, they will have been REWARDED and will have gotten what they were after all along: The first and last say in the Democratic Party's nomination.

The powers that be behind this stunt will also have successfully eliminated the votes of the citizens who would have voted in the election had they believed "it would count". Populist votes, for populist candidates; that's not Hillary. Hillary is the establishment's candidate. Barack Obama wasn't the only Democratic candidate in the race who abided by the rules of the contest, didn't campaign, removed his name from the ballot, etc.

We will never know the true and accurate preference of Florida's and Michigan's citizens. Yes, like 2000, Florida's citizens are screwed, but it's up to Florida's (and Michigan's) citizens to go after the REAL culprits who are stealing their votes. Once you research who was behind this effort to leapfrog over all other states, you can lay that blame at the feet of the Clinton machine and their surrogates. [See the Clintons' Cuban-connection (and problem), Debbie and John Dingell.]

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:17 PM on 05/16/2008
- ATLiberal I'm a Fan of ATLiberal 28 fans permalink
photo

What strikes me is the number of people here saying they won't vote for Obama because of the attitude of ANONYMOUS SUPPORTERS ON A BLOG!! Are you kidding?? Because there are some Obama supporters and TROLLS who are giving you some grief on a blog, you will vote for McCain?? The worst possible choice. Really??

First, we Obama supporters need to chill out. Second, you Hillary supporters need to chill out. There are plenty from BOTH SIDES dishing out abuse. Not a single argument, comment or abusive comment toward either side on this blog will make any difference to the outcome. Civility is important, for a lot of reasons.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:17 PM on 05/16/2008
- dct1999 I'm a Fan of dct1999 380 fans permalink
photo

Well said. My cousin told me she is angry with Obama supporters and will not vote for him. I asked her if she was willing to see the end of Roe v. Wade, the beginning of a draft and the worsening of the economy.

She rolled her eyes and said that wouldn't happen because McCain will owe Hillary's supporters who cross party lines to vote for him and will be forced to govern from the center!!

I love my cousin but I could not believe what she was saying, it was surreal.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 05/16/2008
- Podewumun I'm a Fan of Podewumun 32 fans permalink

You can pick your nose, you can pick your seat, but you can't pick your relatives.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:19 PM on 05/16/2008

"Will owe Hillary's supporters"?

How exactly does your cousin think he will pay them back? By suddenly turning his back of the Republican platform? He's ALREADY in trouble with the more conservative wing of the Republican party who don't think he's conservative ENOUGH. I simply can't imagine him not appointing judges who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Now, as to your cousin being angry with (some) Obama supporters. Passions have gone high on both sides. And there are supporter for both candidates who have written and posted and said and whatever other form of communication you want to cite -- things that have ranged from unkind to cruel and untrue. But I think it is unfair, not to mention downright dangerous to make the assumption that most (or even many) of the supporters of EITHER candidate are filled with this vitriol. ESPECIALLY if you are basing this conclusion on the posts you read on web sites like this -- hardly a cross-section of the electorate.

This is (sometimes) the nature of politics. Now, I am an Obama supporter and an Af-Am male. But I didn't start out that way -- first wanted Kusinich and then Edwards.

If Senator Clinton were to be the nominee, I would vote for her -- no questions, no hesitation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 05/17/2008

And I simply don't understand this position of 'voting for McCain in protest' or whatever.

Understand -- this is the REAL THING, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "PROTEST VOTE"! Don't help the 'other side' win -- you'll most likely regret it not just for the next four years, but maybe for the next 20! That could be the effect of the ruling of the new Supreme Court Justices McCain could appoint.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 AM on 05/17/2008
- ebbtide I'm a Fan of ebbtide 16 fans permalink

I agree with the premise that if Fla and Mich are to be counted, in spite of the agreement made by the candidates and in spite of them stubbornly refusing to abide by party rules, the next election will see states trying to pull the same crap as these two. I say stick with the rules originally made. Those who are dismayed that their vote won't count have to blame their own state representatives and not the candidates.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:38 PM on 05/16/2008
- macbabe I'm a Fan of macbabe 107 fans permalink
photo

Give her what she want's, the results will be the same, if it shuts her up, who cares!
...hope she learned that sometimes changing the rules can back fire on you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:29 PM on 05/16/2008
- JXB I'm a Fan of JXB 4 fans permalink

Giving a tantrumming child what he or she wants reinforces the tantrumming behavior. Being firm , fair, and consistent, and holding to limits previously put in place, produces better results (and behavior) in the long run.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:50 PM on 05/16/2008
- WLA I'm a Fan of WLA 323 fans permalink
photo

Exactly. The rules were in place from the beginning. All parties involved knew it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:55 PM on 05/16/2008
- JMorgan I'm a Fan of JMorgan 3 fans permalink

What she wants is the nomination. Giving her what she wants (a few delegates here, a few delegates there) doesn't shut her up - it takes her to the next step: To make an argument to the superdelegates that Obama "can't win (because he's a n*****, dontcha know)". Then her supporters stage some phony stunts in superdelegates' home states - "uprisings" and "riots" by the white constituents who won't stand for a black man becoming president, and in a few short weeks Hillary would be coronated.

If you don't know the effect that well organized demonstrations in and around a political convention can have, you weren't alive in '68.

This has to stop now. The superdelegates who are undeclared need to be routed out and held responsible for collaborating with the Clintons in trying to subvert the will of the voters, destroying both the rightful candidate and the Democrats' chances in November.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 PM on 05/16/2008
- cmeans29 I'm a Fan of cmeans29 3 fans permalink

Give a person an inch they will take a mile.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 05/16/2008
photo

Your mouth will generally get you into more trouble than it will get you out of...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:16 PM on 05/16/2008
- magen I'm a Fan of magen 16 fans permalink

How many times do we have to go over it?????

You LOST Hillary, it was "inevitable" a long time ago that you would have to get out of Obama's way.

Hillary won't be President of the United States, but we can let her be President of the State of DENIAL.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:59 PM on 05/16/2008
- nick1936 I'm a Fan of nick1936 17 fans permalink

Yes but she will have had more votes than bo jangels

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:15 PM on 05/16/2008
- zebra3 I'm a Fan of zebra3 2 fans permalink

That is not factually even true.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:20 PM on 05/16/2008

How would you know she wld have had more votes? Mind you people like you though she was going to be the nominee on Feb 5

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:39 PM on 05/16/2008
- WLA I'm a Fan of WLA 323 fans permalink
photo

Ain't you got some whittlin' that needs done?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:47 PM on 05/16/2008
- JMorgan I'm a Fan of JMorgan 3 fans permalink

What I resent is spending time truth-squading this repeatedly.

Obama: 16,104,613 49.3%

Clinton: 15,511,003 47.5%

What is not in there and what can't be known are the caucus totals. 14 of them (Obama won them all).

But as we don't go by popular vote, it's irrelevant.

By every measure, Barack Obama beats Hillary Clinton. She is remaining in the race to try to increase one measure (popular vote) which doesn't matter except that she's going to try to use it (and staged racist events) to convince superdelegates to vote for her.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:22 PM on 05/16/2008

Both states have come up with reasonable means to split the votes between Obama and Clinton. My main objection is that both states deliberately violated the party rules by voting before Feb. Therefore, I think that the delegates should each get 1/2 vote as punishment. Otherwise, what is to stop more states from moving up their primary dates in 4 years?

Actually, if I had my way, they would overhaul the entire primary voting process, have 4 or 6 regional primaries and NO SUPER DELEGATES. I keep hearing that the super delegates are supposed to be elected officials, party leaders, etc but that doesn't seem to be the case when you look at who actually are the super delegates.

I definitely vote for a Democratic party primary process revamp.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:58 PM on 05/16/2008

You say "the States should be punished" but why punish the voters who had nothing to do with the changed primary dates. The DNC leaders should be removed from their jobs in those states as punishment. Get real. Just who is being punished.

Anything but one person/one vote is disenfranchisement. Something Dems are supposedly against.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:23 PM on 05/16/2008
- WLA I'm a Fan of WLA 323 fans permalink
photo

This is a PRIMARY. The party sets the rules of the primary. The whole process is not even mentioned in the Constitution.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:48 PM on 05/16/2008
- AMJordan I'm a Fan of AMJordan 27 fans permalink

The DNC had nothing to do with this. It was done by the legislatures in both states.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:16 PM on 05/16/2008

The legislative leaders of the 2 states voted to move up their primaries - Democratic leaders of the 2 states had their fingers in this. It was not the DNC that created the problems. I KNOW the voters would be impacted by cutting the delegates votes in 1/2 but then it is up to the voters in the 2 states to deal with their state leaders.

I live in one of the 2 states involved and my vote was disenfranchised when the state party leaders pushed for and moved up the primary dates knowing full well what the consequences would be. I voted but many of my friends did not as they believed their votes would not be counted. So how can you call the results valid? You can't!

I am also getting very tired of hearing 2 of Hillary's top campaign spokesmen now claiming the votes should stand when they were both involved via the DNC is making the rules punishing FL and MI, back when they thought Hillary wouldn't need the votes to win. Quit insulting my intelligence!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:37 PM on 05/16/2008

Why is anybody still debating this -- she's already over, she just wants her asterisk, and she'll fade...

The fight is with John McCain now, folks.
I don't know which McCain -- there are so many of them:

The one who rode on Keating's airplane, or the one who know rides on Cindy Hensley's airplane?
The one who claimed he'd fly over New Orleans, or the one who ate cake with Bush after Katrina?
The one who would appease Hammas and Syria, or the one who would appease Bush?
The former POW who opposed torture, or the war hero who insists upon torture?
The one who voted against Bush in 2000, or the one who voted for Bush in 2000?
The one who wants 100 years of war in Iraq, or the one who wants to surrender immediately following the conclusion of his first term as President (which is somehow not a point on a withdrawl timeline, because of some geriatric time property?).

Maverick (mick-caine) -
1.old horse that deceptively gallops in opposite directions, towards a political object

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:25 PM on 05/16/2008
- Lisette I'm a Fan of Lisette 39 fans permalink
photo

EVGENY

I AGREE WITH YOU

BUT, HILLARY WILL NEVER GO AWAY
SHE IS LIKE FLYPAPER

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:46 PM on 05/16/2008
- Felicty I'm a Fan of Felicty 31 fans permalink
photo

Hmmmmmmm.

I would have said 'bad stink.'

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:28 PM on 05/16/2008

Why isn't the MSM reporting the real reason why there is such a fuss about seating the delegates from MI/FL from the MI/FL officials.... they want their paid trip to Denver to be part of the convention where they get to rub elbows with the washington elite so that they can further their careers. Those delegates are almost all party insiders looking to further their political careers. That's why they want full seating, so that all those party insiders can go.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:20 PM on 05/16/2008

Felicty don't be so helpful ! I will see you packing sooner ! Complain about Bush? It will be nothing ( by the way, I complain about Bush a lot, that is why I prefer Hillary)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:36 PM on 05/16/2008

Let me clarify this for you, the recent court ruling, barring appeal, could effectively remove any possibility that Sen. Clinton would be deposed on the matter in the midst of a presidential campaign, were she to be the nominee.¨ Peter Paul claims, ¨Had Senator Clinton been forced to testify under oath, as a material witness and beneficiary of the fraud that her husband is being sued for before the Democratic Convention, her remote chances for being nominated the party candidate would have been unquestionably destroyed.¨ With all this yet to be heard by the public and she really thinks she´ll win the nomination....at what cost, losing the White House to a Republican once this gets out!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:14 PM on 05/16/2008
photo

Oh yeah....Clinton.

I forgot.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:59 PM on 05/16/2008

Seriously.

NOthing indicates her fate more clearly than that the MSM has totally ignored her for the past week. On the eve of Oregon/Kentucky no less.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 PM on 05/16/2008

finally MSN is ignoring her...they should have ignored her long before, well, if they had done that, nobody would have watch their programs, speaking about Obama at all times would have been kind of boring...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:25 PM on 05/16/2008

dis·en·fran·chise
: to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote

What gets me is that we keep referring to this stuff as an issue of "disenfranchisement" at all. These primaries (and caucuses) ARE NOT ELECTIONS. They are simply a process for a private organization (the dem party) to conduct internal business. The only right we have as members is to be allowed equal access to participate with other members without being discrimated against on the basis of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

If someone can't get to the caucus to participate, they're not being disenfranchised, they just didn't make it to the meeting where the club members voted.......and if the national organization sees fit to disqualify a state/local chapter from participating in a decision-making process because that chapter broke an agreed-upon rule, it's the organization's right.....period.

So can we please tone down this drama about disenfranchisement and people's voices not being heard and get back to the business of putting our democratic nominee in the White House?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:57 PM on 05/16/2008

Thank you for this post! It's nice to see that there are people out there who understand.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:02 PM on 05/16/2008
- lorisc I'm a Fan of lorisc 4 fans permalink

Thank you. It seems so clear when you put it like that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:37 PM on 05/16/2008
- MrKnuckles I'm a Fan of MrKnuckles 11 fans permalink
photo

As an Obama supporter who did not go to vote in the Florida primary because, I knew it was going to be disallowed by the DNC so I'd just be wasting my time, I don't see how it will now suddenly become more "fair" to allocate delegates to either candidate when so many potential voters like me never cast a ballot. There has to be thousands of unheard Florida voters like myself who can't really be factored in to the proposed delegate splits except as a stupid wild ass guess or just simply being ignored. That's not an accommodation, its just making sh*t up.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:52 PM on 05/16/2008
- tene I'm a Fan of tene permalink
photo

Me, too MrKnuckles. I wouldn't have even heard about the primary election down here if it wasn't for my parents' being so involved in community/political action. The only thing I had heard about that election was that we were supposed to be voting "Yes" on #3 or something like that. There was no advertising about a primary election. (Personally, I'm an independent, so I wouldn't have been able to vote anyway. But I get what you're saying.) I'm sure there are plenty of other Floridians like us who didn't even go or maybe didn't even know about it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:13 PM on 05/16/2008

Well,what Hillary is trying to say is,she will punish you for sticking by the rule and reward those who break the rule. Lawlessness is anouncing itself in the horizon in USA. Thank God she will NEVER be the president

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 05/16/2008
- Softnsweet I'm a Fan of Softnsweet 9 fans permalink
photo

Many people did not vote in Fl or MI, Obama could have won. I have never in my life seen so much evil as I have seen in Hillary supporters. Its frightening because they are all like her. God! can you read? She lost, it is fair and square.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:23 PM on 05/16/2008
- McPander I'm a Fan of McPander 4 fans permalink

Getting quite here....Time to find some more people to convince

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:46 PM on 05/16/2008

DEWEY WINS!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:44 PM on 05/16/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (9 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect