Obama willing to go "more than half-way" on Florida and Michigan

[Care4all]

Like Reilly says they did it to keep out the chaos of a bunch of states moving their primaries, and Hillary was so far ahead they figured it wouldn't make a difference.

And like I have said, HOW could they possibly think it wouldn't make a difference in the General elect for the presidency, or not make a difference in the democratic race...........even with Hillary the front leader? These were two critical states to her being the front runner, TAKING THEM OUT took away that from her, immediately, off the bat....

The Dem rules always said the delegate punishment for these states was cutting them in half, WHY DID THE DNC CHANGE THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE, and make them ALL delegates only now to reverse that decision and give them half now?

If they had followed what we know now are in the rules and were the rules in the dnc handbook on the 2008 primary, cut them by 1/2, just like the rules say and the Republicans did and given those totals to hillary from the beginning, then hillary would not have been in such a horse race looking lke the trailer with Obama and would have been able to garner more campaign support...they DICKED her, BIGTIME....

They also screwed the florida and michigan citizen and they have been scorned by the DNC and their shenannigans with this mess...........
Florida WILL GO SINGLE HANDEDLY TO THE REPUBLICANS because of what these guys did....

Care

 

[Ravi]

Care, way back before the primary was held and the DNC made this decision people in Florida were pissed no matter who they supported. Because we all saw it as the DNC screwing over the voters. And in Florida, we've been screwed over enough...it was hard to see the Dems doing it.

 

[ReillyT]

And like I have said, HOW could they possibly think it wouldn't make a difference in the General elect for the presidency, or not make a difference in the democratic race...........even with Hillary the front leader? These were two critical states to her being the front runner, TAKING THEM OUT took away that from her, immediately, off the bat....

The Dem rules always said the delegate punishment for these states was cutting them in half, WHY DID THE DNC CHANGE THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE, and make them ALL delegates only now to reverse that decision and give them half now?

If they had followed what we know now are in the rules and were the rules in the dnc handbook on the 2008 primary, cut them by 1/2, just like the rules say and the Republicans did and given those totals to hillary from the beginning, then hillary would not have been in such a horse race looking lke the trailer with Obama and would have been able to garner more campaign support...they DICKED her, BIGTIME....

They also screwed the florida and michigan citizen and they have been scorned by the DNC and their shenannigans with this mess...........
Florida WILL GO SINGLE HANDEDLY TO THE REPUBLICANS because of what these guys did....

Care

She was the front runner because she was leading in practically every state. By your argument, punishing any state but Illinois for anything hurt her. The intent of the DNC was not to write off Florida in the general election, whatever the effect of its actions may be. Perhaps if Florida had not been stripped of its delegates and the candidates had campaigned, the race would be different right now, but we will never know.

The DNC took a hard line to try to make sure that primary jumping would not occur in the future. This was permissible within the rules of the DNC. You may disagree with their actions, but their intent was not to damage their own party in the general or to negatively affect Clinton. That it happens to do so may obvious from what we know now, but not what they knew then.

 

[Care4all]

She was the front runner because she was leading in practically every state. By your argument, punishing any state but Illinois for anything hurt her. The intent of the DNC was not to write off Florida in the general election, whatever the effect of its actions may be. Perhaps if Florida had not been stripped of its delegates and the candidates had campaigned, the race would be different right now, but we will never know.

The DNC took a hard line to try to make sure that primary jumping would not occur in the future. This was permissible within the rules of the DNC. You may disagree with their actions, but their intent was not to damage their own party in the general or to negatively affect Clinton. That it happens to do so may obvious from what we know now, but not what they knew then.

I am saying that the DNC took what they thought was the easy way out...OVER punish the heck out of states breaking the rule.....instead of actually reviewing the way we have handled Primaries since McGovern instituted this early state thing in the 80's....

they failed in their responsibilities, they disenfranchised the voter, something they fought like hell to not do in the 2000 election, no matter what Rules deadline was passed.....

Care

 

[doeton]

Care, way back before the primary was held and the DNC made this decision people in Florida were pissed no matter who they supported. Because we all saw it as the DNC screwing over the voters. And in Florida, we've been screwed over enough...it was hard to see the Dems doing it.

may be you think about not electing republicans next time...

 

[Ravi]

may be you think about not electing republicans next time...

I've been trying to get a law passed outlawing Republicans with limited success. Damn critters multiply like rabbits around these parts.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I've been trying to get a law passed outlawing Republicans with limited success. Damn critters multiply like rabbits around these parts.

If McCain wins in November it is going to be hilarious to watch the Dems claim they were cheated again.

 

[manifold]

If McCain wins in November it is going to be hilarious to watch the Dems claim they were cheated again.

Especially since it'll be the republicans that got cheated...right?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Especially since it'll be the republicans that got cheated...right?

We already shot ourselves in the foot. If we win now it will be funny as hell.

 

[Shogun]

If McCain wins in November it is going to be hilarious to watch the Dems claim they were cheated again.

there will be no room to make that charge given that we seem to be hoodwinked by california's replay of Mass '04.

 

[Ravi]

If McCain wins in November it is going to be hilarious to watch the Dems claim they were cheated again.

`

No one to blame but themselves this time.

 

[Jon]

Like Reilly says they did it to keep out the chaos of a bunch of states moving their primaries, and Hillary was so far ahead they figured it wouldn't make a difference.

You're absolutely right. No one cared about taking away Florida and Michigan because they didn't think it would affect the outcome. Well, we're now at a point where it does affect the outcome. If Obama had a big enough lead that the delegates and popular votes in these states didn't make a difference, I would say, "Don't bother." But, it does make a difference, and in a race this close, every vote must count.

 

[Steerpike]

You're absolutely right. No one cared about taking away Florida and Michigan because they didn't think it would affect the outcome. Well, we're now at a point where it does affect the outcome. If Obama had a big enough lead that the delegates and popular votes in these states didn't make a difference, I would say, "Don't bother." But, it does make a difference, and in a race this close, every vote must count.

The only problem with that is there's no way of knowing how the earlier decision, and subsequent acts by the campaigns, affected the votes in those two states, so you can hardly call it a fair vote.

 

[Ravi]

The only problem with that is there's no way of knowing how the earlier decision, and subsequent acts by the campaigns, affected the votes in those two states, so you can hardly call it a fair vote.

I think you can in Florida for a couple of reasons. We were encouraged to vote regardless of the delegate fiasco. And it's extremely improbable that Obama supporters stayed home in greater percentages than Clinton supporters...if anyone stayed home at all.

 

[Steerpike]

What do you base the probability on? There's no basis other than just a gut or common sense assessment. You may well be right, but there's no way to KNOW whether you are.

 

[Ravi]

What do you base the probability on? There's no basis other than just a gut or common sense assessment. You may well be right, but there's no way to KNOW whether you are.

That's true, but sometimes common sense is all you can go on.