An Issue of Legitimacy and Democracy
There have been some who have tried to read my comments last week on CNBC's SquawkBox as stepping back from my support of Senator Clinton. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I personally know, respect and like both Democratic candidates. Both are qualified. Both will be an agent of change from years of profligate spending on a misguided war. Both will address the discontent that results from long unmet needs and the mismanagement of our nation's economic affairs.
That said, I truly believe Senator Clinton is the most qualified and prepared to be our next president. I unequivocally support her candidacy.
My point on SquawkBox was and remains that superdelegates should consider a number of factors in their final decision, particularly after the primaries and caucuses have run their course.
Clearly, the cumulative delegate totals must be considered. Absolutely, the cumulative popular vote is important. And, a practical analysis of electability and the electoral map must be weighed.
For me, the most important of those factors is the popular vote since Democrats have rightfully and passionately long argued that every vote should be counted. Practically, that popular vote should include participation of the fourth and eighth largest states in the nation. Most Democrats agree that ignoring the voices of Florida and Michigan is a mistake and threatens to impact the outcome of the fall elections.
Like many, I fear that not considering the wishes of millions of Democratic voters in those states will taint the attitude of voters everywhere about our ultimate nominee. Early polling in Florida has already indicated as much.
Without a "do over" for those states, the short-term gain could well come with long-term pain for our nominee, the party and the nation.
The party should be responsible and raise funds for a primary "do-over" in a way that doesn't give the competitive edge to one candidate over the other.
I believe, as I think most Democrats do, that the popular vote is the most democratic way to select a candidate. In fact, I recently signed legislation in New Jersey that joins the state in a compact to choose a president by direct popular vote.
When we listen to all of the people in our party, we end up choosing the person the entire party can support.
Loading comments…
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
Florida does not need a revote. I am one of the 1.7 million Democrats who voted in the January 29th vote. All of the candidate were listed on the ballot. Hillary won the Florida primary vote fair and square.
Here is a an OpEd piece in the Palm Beach Post by a Florida State Senator (Ted Deutch-D)
http://www
2008/04/06
His piece explains the short shrift which the DNC gave to the Florida primary waiver request. He also proves that several states were allowed to move up their primaries without penalty. WHY?
Since the DNC does not want my vote in the primary, it follows that they do not want my vote in the general election. If Hillary is not the nominee, she is definitely well ahead of Obama with our votes, then you can bet that millions of Florida Democrats will NOT be voting Democratic candidate in November.
Good Luck Dems, you want our cash but not our vote!
Wel FloridaFlo - it appears to me that you would prefer to see another 4 years of Bush policies. Your logic is illogical.
I agree. Regardless of what my personal feelings are towards whoever the Democratic nominee is, I'd rather vote for a Democrat than for McCain. This would include if the Democratic nominee was the proverbial dead dog, who would seem to be more in touch with reality than the esteemed senator from Arizonaa..
Your post sounds like orc mischief to me. "Good Luck Dems", that doesn't sound like something a Democratic Party member would say, even pissed off. I would guess you are another troll.
I guess if CNBC is for Hillary... That MSNBC & CNN is for Obama!!! I guess it's alright to trash Hillary... But don't you dare say anything against Obama...
If this is what Corzine actually believes, he is not as smart as I thought he was.
well, considering your name...
need I say more?
;-)
Thank you for a good laugh!
Except that's not his/her name. The joke is on you.
You must be out of your mind to say the votes in Florida or Michigan should count. You sir, have learned nothing in the last 8 years. You see, we Americans, believe that rules matter, or at least they did. I used to think you were all right, but in fact you are just a DLCer with no interest in us little folk.
Reading really isn't your thing, is it? He said the party should pay for do overs that doesn't favor either candidate. He doesn't say that the Florida and Michigan votes should count as is.
That's a false argument. Florida cannot get its vote in place in anywhere near the necessary time. And "people who know" know that. That's why the entire Florida congressional delegation, Clinton and Obama supporters alike, opposed a revote. That's why the half-baked mail-in vote was dead in the water - because Florida doesn't have the infrastructure for a mail-in vote.
The position is going to be to call for a revote, and when that fails, say "oh well, I guess we have to count the delegation as it is."
If you are an Obama supporter then what they say about us must be true- we are really not that smart. What part of "the rules apply to everybody but the Clintons haven't we figured out" How many more times does he have to wave that finger (of "i did not have sex with that woman") before we cultist get it.
"There have been some who have tried to read my comments last week on CNBC's SquawkBox as stepping back from my support of Senator Clinton. Nothing could be further from the truth."
That's a shame to hear.
Corzine seems to be back on the reservation. Florida and Michigan votes will be counted once Obama (or Clinton) has enough delegates to gain the nomination. There is no fair way to allow these states to influence the outcome.
Agreed. At the end of the primary season, the superdelegates are going to back the winner, the delegate count far out of reach for Michigan and Florida to be able to affect anything.
At that point, the party is going to say "alright, let them in".
Mr. Corzine is demostrating his immense fealty to the Clintons. Of course, had Hillary ever been ahead in the race for the nomination, Mr. Corzine and the other Clinton loyalists would have been directed to declare the pesky nomination process over with no need for additional contests and on to the next stage of the coronation.
" Without a "do over" for those states, the short-term gain could well come with long-term pain for our nominee, the party and the nation. "
Especially when You and the Clinton campaign keeps telling us so.
It's like the Bush Administration keeps repeating that if we withdraw our troops the it indicates a win by the terrorist. So if and when we have to leave then it Wil be considered a Defeat.
In the past did not Pennsylvania votes feel disenfranchised because the Dem Nominee was already selected by the time we got to there primary.
Gov Corizone, stop preaching this self-fulfulling prophecy !.
I completely agree that a better solution, needed to be found before this process began. I do think this will hurt the democrats in the Fall. But the Florida and Michigan delegations are just as much to blame for this as anyone else. They didn't like the rules, and so they broke them. But the correct time for Hillary and her supporters to point this out, is NOT NOW. It was then!!!!
Changing the rules in the middle of the game, will just embolden states to do this in the future, and no candidate will sign on to a pledge to not campaign in state, and the party will have no control over the schedule.
This will lead to candidates with the most name recognition, and the most institutional backing always winning. ie. Rudy Guilliani.
Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina each moved their primaries up without penalty but the DNC penalized Florida and Michigan. Not very democratic treatment by the Democratic party of millions of voters. So five states were involved and the DNC did not treat them equally.
They moved their primaries up in reaction to Florida and Michigan doing it. Since the Republicans and Democrats were having their primaries at the same time, and the Republican solution was to just strip half of the delegates, the other states moved their primaries up to give them time to campaign in those two states.
Ever notice how the pols claim that the American people are so smart when they validate the pols, but so damn dumb when they don't? Corzine should be embarrassed by the circular logic being peddled by the Clinton campaign. None of these people gave a rat's behind that FL and MI were going to be denied their delegates until Hillary started losing. To be honest, I think that the DNC is a bunch of thugs for denying states to hold their primaries whenever they damn well please. But that's the whole point, isn't it? Enacting super-delegates to override the will of the people. Enacting a strict primary schedule for states to manipulate the will of the people by putting the emphasis on early states.
I'm almost beginning to feel sorry for Hillary. They'll probably have to carry her out of the convention, feet first, in handcuffs, gagged and sedated.
Farmerette, you are excellent in your observations and OMG, I've been discussing this THUG Thang w/the DNC, for some time, now. Thank you for shining sucha bright light on it. And, does Corzine, always write when he's running so fast from Bill (I'll make u a monica) Clinton? Everybody in that clinton camp comes away whupped...
HuffPost's Pick
consider the alternative- every state would have decided to go as early as possible and the candidate with the greatest name recognition would win. Why even bother to have a primary just lets go to an early convention made up of super delegates. My quarrel is not that the DNC tried to prevent states from going early but that they even had a super Tuesday primary in February. I think it helps the democratic process to have the primary calendar staggered as much as possible so that getting the nomination is not just about who has the most money and name recognition. If we allow the madness of national primary to happen the only people who can become President will be those who can afford to spend $200 million of their own money. At which point I would vote for just putting the Presidency on ebay.
I couldn't agree more. The original point of Super Tuesday was to allow the smaller southern states to vote as a block, giving them more power. Why on earth would you take that, and then throw my state, New York, and California, and all the other big northern industrial states into the mix? That's a fantastic way of knocking out everyone but the most financed and well-known candidates (read: Hillary and Barack).
Nobody else ever had a chance.
While it's admirable that Mr. Corzine stands behind his support for Senator Clinton, he is in serious denial regarding the proper role Michigan and Florida delegates should play in the convention. Because those two states had primaries that were clearly stated to have no bearing on the nominating process, most voters did not participate. If a new and complete primary were possible for those states, with adequate time for the candidates to present their case, then it would make sense for the resultant delegates to the right to vote in the nomination. What Mr. Corzine seems to recommend is the disenfranchisement of the voters who understood the fact that the primaries held earlier this year were null and void. While I agree that ALL voters deserve the right to be counted, it is exactly that position that says the delegates can not be counted in the nomination vote.
The ONLY ones to blame for the MI, FLA fiasco are the local elected officials. They all knew full well what the consequences would be, but they decided to gamble on the DNC not punishing them for breaking the rules, even though Dean made it abundantly clear what would happen.
If the folks in these to states feel they have been disenfranchised, their recourse is to vote their representatives and Governors out of office. And that is exactly what they should do.
Their delegates will definitely be seated in Denver. The ONLY fair thing to do is wait until the winner is selected by those of us who followed the rules, then seat their delegates. Or, seat them 50/50. Clinton doesn't like that idea, but she didn't get more than 50 percent anyway, so it more than fair to her.
I'm sick to death of all this whining. In FLA, all the Democrats voted for the bill. In MI, Gov. Grandholm signed the friggin bill. Stop complaining and take your punishment like adults. If those states want to vote for McCain in the GE, they can go right ahead.
Since when do we get to vote twice in America? And since when do we have elections with one person on the ballot? They broke the rules and they have to face the music. Period.
No democracy can exist by ignoring the popular vote and by arbitrarily deciding to split the delegates 50-50. Senator Obama's name was not on the Michigan ballot so this should clearly be a do-over. Florida, however, Senator Clinton won fair and square and by a big margin and so I don't see the point of a do-over--the people have spoken...t
I have a few questions, how do these surrogates get their talking points, it's fascinating to listen to the msm and hear almost verbatum the same things thrown out, who gives them their scripts? Why should we believe that super delegates know more, then the voters, if they know so much, I would think that they look at Iowa, a place that all the candidates go one on one with the voters, that they don't rely on name recognition, gender, race, that it really is the strength of the candidate that matters. So what happened to your candidate, why can't she get across her experience. How do you explain the abysmal campaign she's run, not a smooth campaign by a long shot. I also think that Bill is a little cranky because he hasn't been paid to speak, that he no longer is getting the big bucks. I wonder if Hillary loses this nomination, what that will do for his speaking engagements. If part of the reason he's been paid so much is because everyone knew she'd be running, trying to get back in the White House.
It's a hard one. Should a population that exists in denial and is so expertly manipulated by the MSM special interest groups select a President or should it be done by delegates that, in most cases, they elect? Are the delegates as susceptible to the same manipulation or are they less emotional and more educated on the issues and the forces behind them?
A logical process to help decide is to look at the manipulators. The MSM special interest groups are owned by the people who own and operate the Fed and the military industrial complex.. These people want to sell weapons, finance wars, support cheap labor through illegal immigration, create bubbles which are opportunities for profit for them, and subvert the Constitution. They support Hillary. Hillary is a liar. To ignore that fact just adds to the denial.
It seems that it would be best to err on the side of the founders rather than tear down another part of the Constitution that they so wisely put in place.
Ummmmm....
Oh yes they are!
(Isn't debating fun?)
You are right on; I wish more people could see there are bigger issues around than abortion and gay marriage. The people in power don't give a dam about these issues, they are just instruments they use to manipulate our ever more ignorant population. I know this is offensive to some, but I believe many of Clinton's supporters have allowed themselves to be equally manipulated by buying into the victim/populist BS Clinton is selling (Clinton is DLC they are a top down operation focusing on growth (i.e. more consumers) and corporate power, nothing in there for worker’s rights, limiting growth and developing sustainable local businesses).
Looks like the Clinton campaign and its supporters have perfected the art of grasping at straws.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
