The Michigan / Florida non-issue is settled

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by HazelGod, May 31, 2008.

  1. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    In a decision that I'm sure surprises few, the DEM party's Rules & Bylaws Committee decided to reduce their sanctions against Michigan and Florida for holding their primaries ahead of schedule.

    The committee voted to fully seat the delegations of both states, but to reduce them all to half-votes at the convention. Florida's delegates were apportioned according to the primary election results, but Michigan's were split 69/59 between Clinton and Obama.

    What's the net result of all this brouhaha? Nothing at all has changed...Clinton nets 26.5 delegates today, an insignificant amount that doesn't even begin to erase her total deficit against her opponent.

    The new "magic number" of delegates needed to clinch the party's nomination has increased to 2118 (+92). Clinton's total delegate count is now 1877.5 (+94.5), and Obama's is 2052 (+68)...only 66 shy of sewing it up officially.

    Just as we knew would happen weeks ago, the delegations from Michigan and Florida simply do not affect the inevitable outcome of this contest.

    We now return to your regularly-scheduled thumb-sucking and troll-hunting.
     
  2. Skull Mason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,101
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dirty Jersey
    I think it was pretty fucking stupid really, either don't count them at all for breaking the rules or count every one of them. But even if they did count them all it really wouldn't change much, so what is the big fucking deal to give each delegate a full vote?

    It is just going to split the party more. If they gave clinton all she wanted, her fans would be happy; yet barack would probably still have just a good a chance to win as he does now. Why not seat them all fully? Everyone is happy with the process, barack is still in the lead. [hillary still wins the nomination come denver]
     
    #2 Skull Mason, May 31, 2008
    Last edited: May 31, 2008
  3. Trinity

    Trinity New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,682
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female
    Yep. Game On.
     
  4. simcha

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Over The Rainbow
    Yeah, did anyone else watch the proceedings? I did. It was very telling to watch the Hillary supporters and their bad sportsmanship. They caused such a scene that they almost interrupted the proceedings. And their head goof, Ickles, threatened to take it to Denver on Hillary's behalf. It just shows how desperate and shrill Hillary and her pack of wolves has become. She wants to win whatever the cost. She and her supporters will make sure that John McCain is our next president by taking this to the convention. At least then, we may never have to see Hillary again for a while.

    Yeah, if you watched the crowd it was almost all white ladies who were angrily protesting and making a scene. They are upset because they lost their white privilege and underestimated their competition. Sorry angry white ladies and "hard working" white people of West Virginia, the Clintons no longer own the Democratic Party.
     
  5. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    Half a vote sounds too much like, "half a person:" a policy this country once had that didn't work well either.
     
  6. naughty

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    12,837
    Likes Received:
    14
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Workin&#039; up a good pot of mad!

    YOu can hardly relate election sanctions to the practice of slavery , Jason.
     
  7. B_RedDude

    B_RedDude New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,031
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    California
    It was actually 3/5 of a person. Get your constitutional history right.

     
  8. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    Not so much slavery as an effect of slavery itself: disenfranchisement. The Democratic Party "punishing" people for voting when they don't want them to vote is ridiculous. We're talking two whole states first not having any representation, now only having partial representation. I believe that the civic importance of voting outweighs any political party's, especially one of the country's two largest, idea of a tidy calendar. The party uses public funds and venues to hold these primaries so it's not a matter of internal affairs in a private organization.

    One person, one vote is a hard-won principle in this country and it should always be respected.
     
  9. naughty

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    12,837
    Likes Received:
    14
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Workin&#039; up a good pot of mad!

    So you dont believe they should have set some sort of sanction, even if it was a token one?
     
  10. D_Kaye Throttlebottom

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skull - "seriously" the big deal isn't about doing what is best for Hillary Clinton. It was about the Michigan's delegate votes and Florida's delegate votes and the DNC's rules and by laws committee. Not about what a big deal it is for Hillary Clinton. Though she is the most vested by the outcome.

    The DNC had to retain some sanction for those states - to deter states from riding roughshod over DNC and moving primary dates ahead of schedule. The RNC sanctioned those republican delegates in Florida and Michigan as well by giving their delegates only a 1/2 vote on the onset.

    Hillary got what she wanted w/ Florida, she wanted the result to stand as is. She didn't get the same issue in Michigan - where her name was the only one on the ballot and Obama, Edwards and other democratic candidates took their names off the ballot.

    So Clinton supported a Michigan result of delegates that give a 73-55 split. Hillary, 73 and Obama 55 split. Obama supported a 64-64 split, b/c it was an invalid election - they violated primary rules. The Michigan Democratic Party essentially split the difference, between the two proposals. 69-59 votes. So that is what Hillary's Ilkes guy is bitching about - that they reserve the right to take it to a credentials committee in Denver. The difference of 73 votes to 69 votes. 4 delegate votes. A proposal compromise they agreed upon 3 weeks agon in Michigan.

    The DNC agreed to seat all the delegates from both states - but their vote will only be 1/2, period. The DNC has to sanction for states violating state rules. I think it was a fair decision and politically - Republicans from those states Florida and Michigan were penalized the same way - they get 1/2 a vote at their convention. So it's a lesson for those states on EITHER party to think twice before disregarding primary rules.

    They get to be seated. Hillary got more votes. They have to have something to bitch about to justify continue staying in - so it's the 4 votes on a compromise in Michigan they agreed to already?

    This is not about disenfrachisement. She said she would stay in until the convention to make sure they were seated. Well they will be seated.

    This is an outrage... oh wait - they're going to be seated? So why stay in? We have those 4 delegate votes of Michigan results - we weren't given 73, we were given 69 (a difference fo 4 delegate votes - which means 2 votes at the convention).

    Seriously - Skull - we're scraping the bottom of the barrel to bitch about things she has to fight for to justify continue running - even if she had 4 votes more votes from Michigan and all votes were reinstated - she doesn't have the nomination.

    Seriously, why are we talking about who she is fighting for any more. The DNC is letting those states be seated at the convention.
     
  11. lgej

    lgej New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CT
    Great analysis. At least as good as the professional pundits. Just watch what the sociopathic Clintons do now. All the way to the convention, splitting the party in two, sewing things up for McCain, and launching Hilary into her 2012 run. They are pure evil. My disdain for them is irrational, I'll admit, and visceral. Oh well.......
     
  12. lgej

    lgej New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CT
    I love it!
     
  13. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    No. No amount of party politics is as important as the enfranchisement of voters in the political process. The people of two states stated their preferences and it's absurd and damaging to disregard those people. The people are more important than the party's leadership and their rules.
     
  14. Skull Mason

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,101
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    23
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dirty Jersey
    Thanks for breaking that down for me. But I watched the entire proceedings and get what is going on. The problem is, like I stated above, is that now you have disenfranchised more voters. Some of the people who cast a ballot for hillary, now basically have their vote given to obama. I think it is absurd when obama tries to split the delegates evenly when it was his dumb ass fault for taking his name off of it when 4 other people were politically savvy enough to leave their names on, and uncommitted only got 40%.

    But that is not my point. If it is 4 delegates that is the big difference, why not give them to her because it really makes no fucking difference. Make the voters happy and won't change the outcome of the election. Is that not worth the 4 delegates? I think it is disrespectful, or kind of arrogant, to say "ok we will seat you but you are only worth half" [see jason els above].

    This "breaking the rules" crap is starting to annoy me as well. The rules suck to begin with as Levin said. I don't think it is right that every election Iowa and NH get to more or less determine who is going to win. Props to Florida and Michigan for moving theirs up and trying to fight the DNC for full seating.

    The only thing that was flawed about the election in michigan is that obama took his name off. HE made this election flawed, HIS actions. Yet you want to punish the voters for a moved up primary they had nothing to do with, but yet you award obama for flawing the election? Nowhere in the DNC rules or the michigan rules or what have you does it say you must take your name off the ballot. If north carolina or illinois were not going to count do you think he would have taken his name off those ballots too?

    I also don't think anyone is scraping the bottom of the barrel, if she is ahead in the popular vote it is more than enough reason to stay in.

    But hey, you know what, disclosure is at hand so I really don't give a fuck in the end.
     
    #14 Skull Mason, Jun 1, 2008
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2008
  15. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow

    I watched a good portion if it earlier today...listening to her supporters was eerily reminiscent of reading the posts of certain members on here. Transparently self-serving and disgustingly disingenuous. It was also obvious that several of the superdelegates who spoke for her campaign were idiotic sock-puppets.




    Exactly, Zoe. These are her true colors...she doesn't give the first shit about anyone other than herself. The fact that she's made such a stink about these two states (1) after publicly stating on numerous occasions that they didn't matter and wouldn't count, and (2) knowing that no resolution on their sanction could affect the outcome of this contest demonstrates this. She will grasp at any straw no matter how flimsy, reverse any previously held position or fabricate any persona that she believes will further her self-interest. This was never about Hillary Clinton the Democrat running for President for the good of this nation or its people...it's always been about Hillary for Hillary.

    That the most polarizing figure in modern politics actually ran for the office to begin with was an astounding display of hubris. After eight years of the nightmarish fuckup of the GWB administration and his rubber-stamp Congress, the Democratic party had a first-class ticket to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. All it took to fuck that up was Hillary the wonderkunt to think she deservedt to be the one riding on it.
     
  16. D_Thoraxis_Biggulp

    D_Thoraxis_Biggulp New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,352
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thankfully though, it's far from over. Unlike the idea still presented by the die-hard Hillary supporters, swearing she can still come back and beat Obama, Obama is projected to stand a pretty damn good chance against McCain in November. Money on his beating McCain is smarter than money on Hillary beating Obama.
     
  17. amhersthungboi

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    380
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Australia
    I have been avoiding the political threads on here for a few months out of frustration with the Obama supporters. However, I will say this:

    As an ardent HRC supporter, I'm pleased with today's ruling, and fully support it. Yes, it would have been ideal to give each delegate a full vote, and yes it would be ideal for HRC to get 73 delegates from Michigan, and none for Obama. However, the committee could have ruled in the complete opposite direction and told Michigan and Florida to shove it.

    The whole rancor over a "half vote" is bullshit. The RNC gave those states half votes. Furthermore, the delegates from Democrats Abroad only have a half vote, but no one is bitching about the disenfranchisement of American expats. It is a good compromise, respects the primaries in FL and MI, but also respects the power of the DNC.

    If HRC loses the nomination, which is, unfortunately, I think, about a 90% probability, then I feel she has at least lost it fairly.

    The real question now is what the DNC is going to do differently in 2012. This entire fiasco is the result of the DNC and RNC pandering to Iowa and New Hampshire. It is probably time for the parties to tell those states it is over, and someone else will get a turn to be first. I'm a New Hampshire voter, still, and even I think it is time for the state to lose the first in the nation status. It has no valid claim to it aside from precedent.
     
  18. WifeOfBath

    WifeOfBath New Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2008
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    in transit
    Thank fucking God. One step closer to this clusterfuck being over. Let's just hope that it hasn't lost us the election.
     
  19. Notaguru2

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    This combined with Tuesday's primary results = Obama's nomination. Thank you DNC! The Clinton occupation of the DNC has now ended. This is Obama's party now. =)
     
    #19 Notaguru2, Jun 1, 2008
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2008
  20. swimjock367

    swimjock367 New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Michigan got completely screwed... How can they give Obama 59 delegates and Clinton only gets 69... if there was a revote with Obama's name on the ballot he wouldn't have done well enough to get 59 delegates... and Hillary would've gotten more than 69...

    Think how crazy Obama supporters would be if it was reversed... If Obama was the only one with his name on the ballot to begin with and then the DNC gives Hillary almost as many delegates as him even though she wasn't on the ballot...

    There would be riots all over Detroit if that happened. It's okay to screw Hillary over, but people would go crazy if that happened to Obama...
     
Draft saved Draft deleted