Mich. DNC member: Plan to split delegates flawed

LANSING, Mich. — A top Clinton supporter in Michigan said Thursday the state Democratic Party's plan to split the convention delegates between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama is "fatally flawed."

Democratic National Committee member Joel Ferguson sent a letter Thursday to the co-chairs of the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee seeking to seat all of Michigan's delegates based on the results of the disputed Jan. 15 election. Failing that, he says the pledged delegates should get a half-vote each and superdelegates should get a full vote, a plan Florida also is proposing.

Clinton, who won Michigan's primary, wants to have the full delegation seated. Obama, who is close to having enough delegates to lock up the nomination, has opposed that, noting he took his name off the Michigan ballot after the DNC said it would strip the state of its delegates as punishment for moving up its primary date in violation of party rules.

The rules committee is to meet Saturday to hear plans for seating delegates from Michigan and Florida, which was also stripped of its delegates for holding a January primary.

His letter puts him at odds with the Michigan Democratic Party's chairman and executive committee, which support a proposed 69-59 split.

State Democratic Chairman Mark Brewer disagreed with Ferguson.

Under Ferguson's plan, Clinton would get 73 pledged delegates for winning the Michigan presidential primary, while "uncommitted" would get 55. The Clinton campaign has maintained that Obama should not get any Michigan delegates even though many of his supporters voted for "uncommitted."

"I am convinced that neither the RBC nor the DNC have the authority to take pledged delegates allocated to Hillary Clinton by virtue of the popular vote and assign them to either Uncommitted or to Barack Obama as the challenge seeks," Ferguson wrote in his letter.

The plan to split the delegates 69-59 was drawn up by a four-member team of prominent Michigan Democrats.

"We spent a lot of time working with both campaigns trying to figure out a solution," DNC member Debbie Dingell, who helped draw up the plan, said Thursday. "This is a consensus that was agreed to and the entire executive committee supported. At this point, we're fighting for a principle that's important."

Comments

[Independent voter]

The Democratic Party, under the threats and bullying and payola of the clinton beast has become so totally f*cked that it's time to throw it out and start over.

[Girardo]

Can some Obama supporter rationally explain to me why Obama killed Michigan's Tuesday, June 3, 2008 full primary re-vote....

This re-vote was scheduled on a regular primary day (Tuesday)....during regular polling hours....at all the regular polling precincts.­....conduc­ted by regular polling personnel.....

This re-vote was a one-on-one­.....Barac­k v. Hillary...­.re-vote..­.....Obama didn't like Michigan's January primary results.....so we scheduled a re-vote for Tuesday, June 3, 2008.....only to be killed by Obama.

BUT WHY?

Could it be Obama did not want to lose yet another large important midwestern swing state to Clinton?

Can you imagine where Obama's campaign would be on Wednesday, June 4, 2008 waking up to the headlines, "CLINTON DEFEATS OBAMA HANDILY IN MICHIGAN RE-VOTE!!"

Obama played this one very shrewdly..­....unfort­unately...­.in the process.....he silenced the voters of Michigan.....he'd rather let some "committee" in some back-room deal decide Michigan's fate.....ironic, isn't it?

Read for yourself how Obama's fussiness got Michigan's June 3, 2008 re-vote killed:

“CLINTON RIGHT TO SUPPORT DO-OVER”
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Laura Berman: The Detroit News

SOURCE: http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080320/OPINION03/803200370/1374

[bmsrosmuc]

'all the technical objections, which question the ETHICS of privately funding an election or the fairness of an election that would exclude those(IND, REPUBS, AND DEMS) who voted Republican on Jan. 15, '

i think the answer was right in the op-ed you sighted. Maybe when you only look at something in a way the helps your candidate, you are blinded to another case that can be made.

Obama didn't block it, just didn't help it along. Why would he, he planned for the full primary cycle.

It was just getting creepy to have a privately funded primary and even the clinton supporters in the legislature bailed on it, once they realized the ethical implications of BIG donors of a campaign dictating an offical primary.

Hillary could have run a better campaign to include the states that followed the rules and then she wouldn't be relying on second chance primaries.

[Independent voter]

Why don't you explain why the sleazy clintons REFUSED to allow the good people in MI to hold a caucus for their revote.

MOE
RON

[edwarvir]

MOE You are as strong or sick as your leader. Hill/Bill are not leaders they are
very sick people.. I really hope for their sake they will get some help.

There is not a person alive that can explain Hill/Bill's sick mind to us and why
they do the things they do . Why they are always tryi;ng to make wrong , right





Just pray from them

[cubs325]

for someone who wants to treated as an equal - hrc sure likes to complain about being treated like an equal

[BonzaiBoy]

Mr. Ferguson is correct, it IS fatally flawed--fatal to the Clinton dream.

[Independent voter]

God I hope so. I can't wait until the clintons are GONE. All three of them

[synergie]

So, with the logic used by many in the media and on this board, would this rather hateful phrasing be calling for the assassination of the whole Clinton family?

[nibblybits]

Another pro-Clinton PAC is running commercials advocating seating all the delegates from FL & MI. Needless to say, the commercial is low-rent pathetic.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/30/new-group-pressures-dnc-in-ads/

The PAC is organized by Jenny Doggett, reached here:
John X & Jennifer M Doggett
8 Penniman Rd
Brookline, MA 02445-4108
[phone]

Feel free to give her a call.

[Marcospinelli]

This is, and always has been, a fight for the Democratic Party from the grassroots up. Obama supporters should already know this. The fight is against the establishment within the Democratic Party and that establishment includes Pelosi, Reid and to some extent Howard Dean. Just like you rise within the military to become a general by being independent, you don't rise to become the chairman of the DNC (or governor of Vermont), or Speaker of the House or Senate Majority Leader without having paid your dues, being a team player.

Hillary Clinton is flying and busing in her supporters to demonstrate at the rules committee meeting on Saturday. Watch for groups organized by LULAC, which are not "women's issues groups", but representative of questionable big money interests that are desperate for a Clinton in the White House.

If you want change, if you want to make a difference and have this thing end anytime sooner than the end of August, in Denver, you have to show up: 9:30AM on May 31, 2008 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington, D.C.

[bmsrosmuc]

If you are truely a democrat, you will not go and provide material for the gop's 527's in the general. Obama has asked that people do not show up to demostrate and judging by the campaign he has run, i'd say he knows what he's doing.

do not go and make fools of yourselves in the name of the Democratic Primary.

[Marcospinelli]

If the 2000 election and the post elections days in Florida taught us nothing else, it's that what helped Bush and Republicans get away with the theft of that election was the Republican-driven protesting, the bullying, that wasn't met with counter-protesting. That sent a very clear message to the "deciders" (from the Miami-Dade registrars that stopped the ballot counting to the USSC) that the people who "wanted it more" was Bush and Republicans, and thus they should win, because if they don't get it they'll cause so much trouble, whereas the Democrats just seem to take it without fighting back.

If you think that Hillary Clinton won't be using the situation of only pro-Clinton supporters at that meeting to underscore her pitch the next few months to superdelegates and pledged delegates to vote for her, you haven't been paying attention. And you'd better get ready for the surprise from out of nowhere when Hillary Clinton comes out of the Democratic Convention as the party's nominee. And then get used to a Republican administration in the White House for a long time to come.

[riverhouse]

The DNC is bound by law as to what they can or cannot do. The attorneys for the DNC have said it is not legally possible, not to mention unethical, for them to give Hillary what she wants. Hillary is pissed because she's lost to this young upstart when she thought she was going to ride the tide of adulation and entitlement into the White House, Bill considers the election a referendum on him. And, he upset that he's got some explaining to do to all his financial deal makers who were counting on Bill and Hillary being back in power. They have both ruined their reputations so soundly that neither will ever be considered more than unprincipled political hacks.

[fungeezer]

What I want to know is:

1. Who exactly is paying for the demonstrators to be there? Who is footing the bill?

2. Who will pay the legal expenses for any legal expertise needed in all this brouhaha?

I certainly expect it will not be the Democratic party or the Democratic supporters. That would be insane and unethical.

[paganmist]

Hillary supporters will flood the DNC meeting looking for a fight.

There will be no Obama supporters around for miles.

They'll mill about, complain to themselves about how much Obama sucks.

They'll come home and talk about how Obama is so unpopular, no one showed up to defend him.

They'll say Obama's smug and presumptuous for not sending anyone to defend him, as if he's already the nominee.

When they realize they hurt Hillary more than helped her, they'll say Obama's supporters made them do it.

They'll blame the "sexist Obama camp" for "forcing" them to do it.

Blame, threat, blame blame, threat, rinse wash repeat.

See? I can predict the future too, and I don't need flawed poll data to do it.

[frumke]

Not really the thread for this post, but this is a serious question. Several Clinton surrogates, and some others, keep referring to sexist comments in the media and by the Obama campaign regarding Clinton. Maybe I'm too old or too insensitive, but I haven't heard anything that I consider sexist. Yes, a few borderline comments, but no more across the line than the few borderline race-baiting comments from the Clinton side. In other words, it seems to me that the racist comments and the sexist comments from both sides are pretty much without basis.

If anyone disagrees regarding the sexist comments, can you please provide examples?

Thanks.

[ipotter]

Just a quick search shows a couple of Obama's comments that lean toward sexism:

"I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal."

"You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out."

This one is more obvious, but directed at a female reporter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Juy9NwI8_i0

There are probably more out there that made the news.

[JimR]

Those are pretty weak... I think you need to be extremely hypersensitive to say Obama is a sexist based on those examples alone.

[McPander]

So you will vote republican over those statements?

Good luck with that......

[McPander]

Also the quote was"I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's down in the polls, she launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal."

[frumke]

I think you made my point. Yes, I can see how someone could, possibly, interpret those statements as sexist. I don't personally interpret the statements as sexist, but I can see that interpretation.

And yes, I can see how someone could, possibly, interpret some Clinton statements as race baiting or even racist. I don't personally interpret her statements that way, but I can see that interpretation.

It seems to me that Geraldine Ferraro and others who are claiming sexism are beyond hypersensitive. The first two examples she harped on (the Annie Oakley comment and the Jay-Z move) are argued by a great many women to be non-sexist, and i agree. Likewise, I think the arguments from Obama supporters that Clinton intentionally race-baited (or, worse, that she is somehow racist) are equally without merit.

So, my question is, why does all the noise continue from Clinton supporters? New York NOW openly said "vote for the woman, regardless of her views and your views, simply because she is a woman." Is all the screaming coming from people who have that same mindset?

[ipotter]

"...The right to choose candidates at a primary election which, by state law, is an integral part of the procedure of choice or which in fact effectively controls the ultimate choice, is included in the right to choose representatives, and this right is secured by the Constitution..."

This really isn't an argument. It is law. The votes should be counted, and delegates allocated appropriately. If that doesn't happen, everyone should be very upset.

[JimR]

Not really. The Constitution covers general elections, not primaries. The Founding Fathers abhorred political parties.

Primaries, by their nature, exclude some voters. In all but a few states, if you are a registered Republican, you cannot vote in the Democratic primary, and vice versa.

And letting voters decide who the nominee is is actually a fairly recent development in U.S. history. It used to be the party bosses determined who they wanted to put up in the election.

[ipotter]

There is a judicial ruling that says voting in primaries is a constitutional right. So, yes it is.

[fungeezer]

That only applies to the General Election. The primaries are run by the individual states, and each individual state may have different ways of conducting them, i.e., voting in booths, caucuses, etc..
The parties establish rules for dates of proceedings and these are agreed to by the DNC and signed as rules. Technically, once signed, it is akin to a contract.

[DasBoot]

Do Clinton supporters realize that they are following the Republican playbook--once again--by pursuing a strategy of litigation and mob intimidation? Bending the rules and bussing in angry supporters, doesn't that sound earliy like Florida in 2000?

Yet in pitch perfect Orwellian double speak, Hillary announces that she is taking those unusual measures to PREVENT another recount disaster! I have to give it to her, it takes a special kind of brazenness to lie with such a straight face. But at this point I assume lying is second nature to her.

[clearthinker2008]

I just don't get how Hillary says Obama shouldn't get ANY Michigan delegates with a straight face. Oh, I forgot for a minute that she is a professional liar.

Hillary Clinton is a experienced professional liar
Obama 08

[thegreatgiginthesky]

Well she did say that she was dodging sniper fire with a straight face. Saying that Obama should not get any Michigan delegates is mild compared to that.

[edwarvir]

clearthinker2008, what the heck are we teaching our young people. That you can break
the rules and be rewarded for it. If anybody should get the most votes it should
be Barack , because he followed the rules.

I know better than to get upset with her, because I realize she is sick , but I wish
she would use her benefits and check into a hospital. She is sick.

[BillyShears]

She is a professional liar who also has a really bad memory. She seems to have forgotten one of the cornerstones of Democracy - that "we are a nation of Laws and not of Men."

Its been 8 long years - aren't we all a little tired of this kind of tone from a president?

[INDYBIGT]

I like that screen name- the one and only billy shears!

As I have said often, this is starting to look like the election of 2000 when the Bush people out of FL sent protesters out to raise hell. Their theatrics, indignation and threat of civil disruption pushed the situation to a head before the facts of the disputed FL votes could be investigated fully.

And the Gore people took the HIGH ROAD (like Obama is doing now) and LOST due to the premature Supreme Court decision ending the recount.

We should not underestimate the power of the RABBLE-ROUSER to usurp the Democtratic process.

RABBLE-ROUSER: one that stirs up (as to hatred or violence) the masses of the people : demagogue

[synergie]

Unless he has changed his name to "undecided", its a stretch of logic to assume that he can claim those votes. Which is precisely what this ploy was based on, its dirty politics. Why take your name off a ballot? He shouldn't get votes that are not expressly for him, had Clinton made this argument this site would be overflowing with the frothy venomous deluge regarding how dirty, how evil, how unnatural etc. such a move would be. Since it was the anointed one, its still abuse Clinton.

I've seen this approach before, its how Bushy boy was treated prior to and into the past several years, so now the tanned version of the man with a slightly better preaching ability is being accorded the same treatment. Lovely.

[thegreatgiginthesky]

Hillary and her supporters are going to take the party down. After McCain gets elected their all going to be sitting around wondering what happened to their rights and why some old geezer in the Supreme Court is telling them what to do with their bodies. Good luck to us all.

[vippy]

It seems they know what they are doing, my candidate or no one. Shows how few people are
actually going for Clinton, she is $ 20+ plus in debt and Obama has $ 40 million from us voters.
The winner is clear!