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.

Comments

[SamanthaJaneSalem]

The Clinton campaign leaves me feeling dizzy. Mission accomplished.

According to their logic, all the candidates should still be in the race-- don't the voters of Montana deserve a chance to vote for Chris Dodd?-- and no primary season should ever be over until Puerto Rico has made its voice heard (although in the fall we tell Puerto Rico to shut up).

Elections are as much about rules as votes. The rules are uneven, maybe not even fair-- but there are things like deadlines for registration, the correct voting site, having one (hopefully not two or three) pieces of ID. And, this year, the rules didn't include Florida and Michigan.

Of course, Senator Clinton could have protested these rules loud and clear when they were made. But she didn't need Florida and Michigan then. This thing was going to be over by February 5. Which meant, Pennsylvania wouldn't have mattered either. And if she had lost Ohio, PA wouldn't matter because she'd be out.

This thing is being dragged on (and on) not in order to achieve clarity about the nominee, but in order to cause enough confusion to throw the process into complete chaos. Democracy isn't the issue-- it's called winning at all costs.

[Amminadab]

1) Howard Dean and the DNC do not have the authority to strip states of their delegation.

2) It doesn't matter if the candidates agreed to these rules, they don't have the authority to strip states of the delegations either.

3) Each state Democratic Party, is solely responsible for their own method of choosing delegates, the national party has no say in this matter.

4) Only a majority of the entire delegate count at the Convention can vote to unseat any particular delegations.

5) Rules? What rules? There are no rules in politics.

Watch and learn, children.

[elbowguts]

Wow. You are so much smarter than everyone else here; may I suggest you start your own discussion site so you don't have to spend so much time explaining these complicated issues to a bunch of kids?

BTW, I got drunk and wrecked the car, Dad.

[Dajo]

Jon,

You are right on point. I agree completely with you as I am sure do the vast majority of Democrats.
You need not explain your words or reasoning to me or any other American who truly respects the Democratic process.
It is my hope you continues to share your wise council with our Democratic Nominee. A voice of reason like yours is something that we need to see alot more of comming out of the mouths of our Government Leaders.
Thank you for you life long committment to Democratic Governance. Your efforts continue to help make us a better Nation.

[whatsmyname]

DAJO TO EARTH? COMMITMENT? And note the correct spelling dajo..... Corzine's, commitment is a huge joke as many of these so-called politicos really can't find a job in the private sector and at a real job if you lie and steal you more than likely will not be doing much 'real" work so you'll be fired anyway. No, the vast majority of D's do not agree with his tired old ramblings and if anything he too thinks HRC, should be handed the presidency. That is thee worst mindset -ever- and it has done more damage to this country in the past two decades because it just feeds the greedy.

[RAND7044]

What a shame. I voted for you mr. Corzine. I assure you come next time round it wont happen again. New jersey is awash with a corrupt dem party. I sware I will vote for Kean Jr. if he decides to run against you. This nonsense article goes at the heart of your leadership of my beloved state. Where the hell was your concern and outrage before the primary season started. Northeast Dems are so use to installing the candidates of their choice that it never occured to Mr. Corzine to wait until the primary season got underway before he endorsed that train wreck from New York. This from the man who is trying to sell our toll roads to private companies mean while my propety taxes are through the damn roof. Jesus, i sware I will just settle for mere competence of our elected officials.

[Axolotl]

Senator,

You were brilliant at Goldman, but what happened? You know trust when you see it from your Wall Street career. Can't you see the lack of trust in Hillary, because of all her untruths and hair splitting and wild promises? How can you associate yourself with her. She is killing the party.

Why do you support her overturning the rules and conditions she agreed to in MI and FL? She is constantly backtracking, moving goldposts, etc.

She would foul up, not fix, our country's problems at home or abroad.

[Give Peace A Chance]

What a sad story.

McCain was losing when Florida voted. He got 36% of the vote but via their rules, he was awarded all the delegates. So some could be crying the voters were disenfranchised.

Obama is going to be the democratic nominee. The math is very simple. Hillary and her surrogates whining about losing may very well put McCain in the White House because it makes the Democratic party look so pathetic and incompetent.

Both Gov Crozine and Rendell need to pipe down and stop talking about changing the rules and overthrowing the will of the people. The rules were agreed to by all parties. And both states have already said they will not hold a do-over.

[lenners]

"Hillary and her surrogates whining about losing may very well put McCain in the White House because it makes the Democratic party look so pathetic and incompeten­t."
wrong.
Obama surrogates whining about attacks and wanting Hillary drop out will do that far better than anything else.

[GLBorchert]

How do you propose to factor in popular vote in the caucus states? If you don't factor this in properly, you will create the same kind of disenfranchised voter reactions in those states that you are fearing in Michigan and Florida.

[elbowguts]

Here's a link with good information about the Michigan Primary situation and the specific objections of the Obama campaign. There's also a letter from the Clinton campaign that is in drastic contrast, both in tone and content.

The Clinton letter criticizes Obama for removing his name from the Michigan ballot and is riddled with logical inconsistencies.

http://www.observer.com/2008/obama-lawyer-questions-michigan-re-vote-plan

[Parducci]

If the Democrat Party can't run its own nominating process, how can it be trusted to run the country?

[MJ20]

Two things govenor, from a NJ resident who voted for and supports you. First of all we have a HUGE budget problem in NJ. What are you doing meddling in this when the our states' economy is just about to completely melt down? I understand that you are a HRC supporter and that is cool, but I think there are, and should be, bigger fish on your plate to fry. We've already had the NJ primary and Clinton won last time I checked. I'd like to request that you be about the business of running NJ, instead of offering to pay for primaries in other states. My second point is, let's hope you put forth as much support for Barack Obama after all of this is over.

[elbowguts]

> Most Democrats agree that ignoring the voices of Florida and Michigan
> is a mistake and threatens to impact the outcome of the fall elections.

Here's what I don't understand: The argument is made that FL and MI Democrats will be so upset about being "disenfranchised" that they will deliberately not cast a vote for the candidate they prefer. It's kind of like getting revenge by punching yourself in the face.

I think the disenfranchisement angle is more truthfully expressed as "If Hillary Clinton isn't the nominee (by hook or by crook), then I'm taking my ball and going home."

[accountability]

Seriously?
You might want to visit a few threads on HuffPo and count up how many Obama supporters say they will vote for Nader, vote McCain, write in Obama or not vote if Clinton is the nominee.
While there make an objective assessment of how Obama supporters treat (attack) Clinton supporters and the level of ugliness, hate, venom, malice and lies they spew about Clinton herself or anyone associated with her.

There is a distinct lack of respect and yes, plain decency among Obama supporters here on Huffington Post. The Clinton crowd is getting more vociferous in their comments but disparity in the level of pure hate in content, numbers, or intensity is striking. This is a damning piece of evidence if one looks at a candidate by the supporters he engenders.

If you do this objectively you may understand why some would not want to vote for Obama. There are many people who feel so disenfranchised, discounted and demeaned by Obama, his campaign and supporters they have turned off. Some of them were in fact Obama supporters themselves. The divisive practices of so called Progressives has been a very sad disappointment for many who started out so proud about both our candidates, the Democratic party, and showing America and the world what we stood for.

Thank Yourselves if McCain wins. The neocon like divisiveness and hatred you have used as a weapon to destroy another human being is what will decide this election. I hope you are proud.

[elbowguts]

Yes I'm serious, but not only did you fail to address my main point, you threw in a lot of hearsay and irrelevance.

But you do bring up another topic that many people fail to understand: Obama has many strong supporters who are not Democrats and so feel no need to pledge a vote for Clinton if Obama is not the nominee. Prior to 2000, I had voted in five presidential elections and never voted for a Republican or a Democrat. I'm one of those freaks who votes for the candidate they sincerely think will make the best president (not the best out of Rep/Dem).

Which is why I don't understand why someone would complain about being disenfranchised and then deliberate vote counter to their actual feelings about which candidate would be the best president.

Obama is the first major party candidate I'm actually excited about.

[sleepless]

Dear Jon Corzine,
Your words exemplify what I (a lifelong democrat) hate about the party. If you support Clinton, just say so, declare your SUPER voter number now, and stop your whining. We non super voters know that you and your co-supers will decide. We know that there were rules and that MI and FL broke them (altho FL got screwed by their Republicans). So we are all screwed, again. What we have left is a few primary/caucases, and your votes. The supers should declare now. The remaining contests continue without the gaminess of all of you. That means you have to take your politician fingers out of the political wind, and vote as we do, for who we support. My candidate was gone by the time I voted, so I chose, voted, and got over it. If you keep carping on this you make yourself look very foolish. We are smarter than that.

[accountability]

If you support Clinton, just say so

Sleepless:
he said so.

[lenners]

lolz, yeah what I was thinking.

[mav4499237]

I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but I wish someone could tell me a few things....­.First off, the Democratic party's name is a derivative for democracy.­....and I've yet to find anything that says in a democracy you only count certain votes. And why as citizens aren't we all outraged..­...by these political hacks telling us what votes count or don't count. I'm an undecided voter, but these two states need to re-vote, and if the democrats don't count them, they are even worse than the repubs.

[WFMurray]

Hillary is two faced and will turn on a dime if it was adventageous to her or her corporate supporters.

[AreYouFibbing]

Gov. Corzine...­.thanks for your support. And, you should know by now the msm and bloggers will twist your words to fit their cause. Keep up your good works and hopefully, we will see President Hillary Clinton in the White House!!

Viva Hillary
Yes She Will
America's Best Hope

[Maifmart]

Since both States have already determined that they can't re-do primaries and Hillary refuses caucuses, it seems the only reason to keep bitching about them, other than the legislative super-delegates from the States who also lose their votes, is as an argument to super-delegates that Hillary owns both States and they should consider that when voting? Of course we're now so far past the kitchen sink strategy that Hillary is claiming that elected delegates can change their votes in her favor too.

[Giopaps]

Senator Clinton an agent of change from years of profligate spending on a misguided war? Maybe she was misguided when she voted for the war. However her refusal to apologize for her vote to go to war to the American people who are paying the bill does not show the character of an agent of change. More the character of an agent of hypocrisies.