Florida's failure. They did not act "in good faith".

When I got up this morning I vowed I would leave the topic alone. But a brief look at local news channels changed my mind. I saw once again statements quoted by Steve Geller blaming Howard Dean for the Florida mess.

I saw once again quotes from the interview by Corinne Brown saying that
Howard Dean should resign.

It is like there is no truth in this situation, that everyone gets to make their own. Even if we overlook that fact that rules were broken deliberately..they went along from the start..you can not get past the fact that they made no "good faith" effort to fix it.

Transcript from Rules and Bylaws Commission



Florida did not act in good faith according to the committee. This video was one of the most glaring things.

Senate Democratic minority leader presents his amendment..sort of

A senator who introduced the bill said being relevant was more important than partying in Denver



TBO.com had an article called Primary Predicaments. They pointed out a lot of things, long article. The Florida Democrats need to own up if for no other reason than the fact that the GOP has the facts down cold. I think a list is included at the link.



I have been critical of Florida bloggers for not speaking up on this issue. Yesterday I read the words of a major Florida blogger:



I guess he did not read this DNC document. No, Ken, the DNC did not break the rules.



I will stop pointing out how Florida Democratic leaders are acting when they stop acting like that. They need to stay off the TV, they need to own up to their role in this.

it has made no difference whatsoever. Sad but true.

You have helped educate a lot of people on this board, and I appreciate it very much.

by the scope of your information, how you have the time and patience to pursue and post all of this.

I appreciate what you have done. Thank you.

The.VOTERS. did.not. do. anything. to . deserve. not. to. vote.


Blame it on the superdelegates. Strip THEM of their votes.

... Some people didn't vote because they were told they didn't count.

The voters are not disenfranchised. 3 courts have decided that. So has a supreme court ruling.

That is one of the FL party's talking points that really stuck like glue. They pulled it out of thin air.

Even if it made no difference? That would have been good faith.

The DNC asked them to stop, and they just got worse. 3 courts have said the DNC was right.

But Florida leaders keep on.

Do you see the hatred in this post toward me for posting facts? That is the result of what Florida did.

as well...unless you should choose not to take part.

just probably not one selected by the DNC . . .

.

good by.

put a level of control over the nominating process?

And did not the "superdelegate" concept come from the DNC?

Article 2 of the Charter of the Democratic Party states it is a duty of the DNC to fill vacancies for nominee for Pres and VP. And that is exactly what I stated earlier.

so I guess that settled it for you, as far as right and fair and counting votes correctly? Bet it didn't. Disenfranchisement is disenfranchisement regardless of who starts it or for what reason. Would you have supported a poll tax way back when, it was in writing, the courts approved, and everyone knew about it. It was still wrong, same way as the Bush ruling was wrong and the way Dems votes not counting now is WRONG. Some people will always stay at home, their cars die, they are their kids are sick, they can't get off work, but you don't discount the votes of those who made it to the polls.

Or is the hate just irrational now?

Florida could have kept all their delegates if they voted no.

They made a choice.

Don't worry, Victor to the rescue. The appeals court has urged him to refile on the basis of equal rights...so it will go forward.

The courts and Victor to the rescue.

punish the party . . .punish the party leaders . . .

DO NOT PUNISH THE VOTERS!!!

And the elitist superdelegates . . . what a crock. The DNC just does not want to leave the nominee selection to the voters. They just have to exert their own power.

.

and should be tossed out. Or at least, the morons who agreed to the stupid rules should suffer the consequences.

.

to have their votes count. Especially not for trivial things like election dates which is province of the state and not the Democratic party. Political parties have no business trying to dictate to states when they hold an election. If they wanted to do that they should have set a date for all the states and said "none before this date" and apply it to all states equally not to just two states.

You said:



And they did, and the date was Feb. 5th. And FL and MI were the only two who broke the rules. The other four were already ahead of that date in the pre-window with permission to be there.

Have you read anything I posted on this? I never cease to be amazed.

"Apply it equally to all states." Are New Hampshire, South Carolina and Iowa going to be allowed to seat their delegates at the convention?

They are so apparently rules are for some and not for others to follow.

I quoted your words, and I answered you. That is what Florida has done...they have people making up stuff and refusing to see that those four states were already ahead of Feb. 5th.

We are no better than Bush and his lies when we act like this.

Florida has hurt all of us.

everyone. It shouldn't be "Well you can vote before Feb 5th and you can't." One rule for everyone no exceptions.

good by to you too.

Why is it so easy to disenfranchise FL & MI and not New Hampshire, South Carolina & Iowa? Without checking I'd be willing to bet that either FL or MI has a greater population than those 3 states combined.

I'm not a Hillary fan I just think it was and arrogant and short sighted way of handling things.

The DNC decided that it was in the party's best interest to start the contest with the following: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. Why are those states so special? Here is why. The states are geographically diverse (Midwest, Northeast, West and South) to get a sense of a candidates appeal across the country. The states are small to give candidates without a lot of cash a chance to compete. Additionally these states have a fair mix of racial and political make-ups. This was not a decision made arbitrarily, it was a well thought out plan designed to satisfy a desired criteria and produce a good candidate for us to run in the fall. It was a good, decent and fair plan.

Then Michigan and Florida fucked it all up.

but the people of those states didn't. I agree with the previous poster who suggested removing the votes of FL superdelegates, but let the votes of the voters stand. It's a fair way to get out of this mess without totally alienating millions of people in these two important states.

But that their votes had to be done in conjunction with the rules.

How many times does he have to say it? They are working on ways to resolve it.

Florida Dem leaders need to shut up now and let the compromises work.

I'm sorry, but you sound like a rich co-worker of mine that claimed he shouldn't have to pay more money in taxes because he "didn't vote for Bill Clinton". At some point people have to live with the decisions that their elected representatives make. Sometimes those decisions are ones that you don't agree with and sometimes those decisions harm you personally, but that is the way things work. The alternative is anarchy.

That seems to be really hard for some people to get.

that sounds just like the GOP's argument about same-sex marriage - opens the door to people marrying their pets.

It has nothing to do with voter disenfranchisement. If the DNC had in their rules that the primaries and caucuses would be for show, and that final selection of the presidential and vice-presidential nominee rested in the hands of the Chair of the DNC, that would not be disenfranchisement either. It would be the DNC following their own rules on how they determine what names will appear on the ballots as the Democratic ticket. This is not preventing anyone from voting for whoever they choose for President. If you don't like who the DNC selected for their ticket, YOU ARE FREE TO VOTE FOR WHICHEVER CANDIDATE YOU CHOOSE. This is not preventing anyone from getting their names on the ballot. Any candidate for President who does not like who the DNC selected for their ticket IS FREE TO HAVE THEIR OWN NAME ON THE BALLOT, provided they do it in accordance with state law. Disenfranchisement is a violation of law, not of DNC rules. If you don't like the DNC rules, join the DNC and lobby to have the rules changed.

about the stupid rules, about "disenfranchisement"...that is how it is here. Talking about the way things went down does not matter to anyone.

Florida has done its propaganda job well. Now all the Florida bloggers who went along with the charade are patting themselves on the back and saying see....now we will bring some change.

In actuality in a year when all things were working for us, now the hatred among Florida Democrats is working against us as a party. Truth does not matter anymore.

The word "disenfranchisement" was plucked out of thin air, and the DNC said they should be cautious using that word. Florida was trying to give it a racial component....to their shame.

that they cannot discern fact from fiction . . .

And you hold the key to what is true - and cannot fathom anyone seeing the situation differently.

Sorry - but some just see it differently than you - get over it.

I live in Florida, and I can speak about what really happened here. The FL Democrats, wanting more power, decided to push for moving up the primary date of FL even though they knew the consequences from the DNC. They all thought (wrongly) that the DNC would cave because FL is so big.

Jeremy Ring, a DEMOCRAT FL senator from Ft. Lauderdale, initiated the proposed date change. One of Ring's campaign promises to voters in his campaign was that he would work to move up FL's primary date. The Republicans were more than happy to go along with Ring's proposal.

Once the FL Dems realized the DNC was serious about the punishment for the violation, they still went forward and many were quoted in FL newspapers as saying they felt the DNC would back down before the convention.

ALL of the Democratic party candidates, including Hillary Clinton, agreed to abide by the DNC ruling regarding the FL and MI primaries. She made no complaints at that time about FL being disenfranchised, she was even recorded as saying FL didn't count.

The reason for the huge turnout at the primary in FL was because the HOMEOWNERS in FL were voting on a very important amendment to the state constitution that would increase the homeowners' homestead exemptions, decreasing their property taxes. They were NOT flocking to the polls to vote for Hillary even though their votes didn't count.

The people that were disenfranchised, if you will, were the FL democrats that do NOT own homes -- mainly younger Democrats and minorities. They stayed home because they believed the DNC when it said the votes wouldn't count.

Since the primary, the FL Democrats have had several options to fix the problem, including holding caucuses, but have rejected all of them. Some were rejected due to cost or logistics, Hillary Clinton said she would not accept a caucus. The FL Dems, by their statements and actions, still seem to hold onto a belief that the DNC will relent and allow the delegates to attend the convension. THAT explains why nothing has been done.

I, as a Florida Democrat am angry at:
1) the FL Democrats who played chicken with our votes and lost
2) Hillary Clinton for trying to manipulate the rules NOW because she needs the votes
3) the DNC for letting Hillary Clinton incorrectly use the FL primary mess as a campaign slogan for herself, blaming Obama because there was not a revote
4) the media for allowing Hillary Clinton's accusations blaming Obama for disenfranchisement to be repeated over and over again without explaining the actual facts

Will I stay home in November because of the blunders by the FL Dems and DNC? Hell no. Will I vote for Hillary Clinton? Hell no. Will I work to change the process in FL and go after the FL Dems responsible? Hell yes.

Those that caused the problem should ultimately suffer the punishment from the voters...teach them a hard lesson.

but am not big on either Obama or Clinton so am not taking a position to favor either candidate. I'm taking a position of honoring votes - period the end. So you are saying it's OK to disenfranchise voters, because we weren't smart enough to vote for the person you favored? You know damn well that if the shoe were on the other foot, Obama would be screaming "disenfranchisement, let my people's votes count" from the highest rooftop, along with most of this board. It makes me sad when counting votes becomes a partisan witch hunt. So many Dems seem to have lost all sense of values or proportion in their mania.

It is the one the FL party used when they sent emails around saying to stop donations to the DNC.

change the rules now. However the DNC should not have made the rule disenfranchising FL & MI. It was a stupid move and the result is the current party infighting and the people of two states are not having their voices heard. It was just plain bad policy. Democratic party members are not in total control of either states legislatures and the party punished the rank and file party members for something they didn't control. If it had been handled differently we wouldn't have this problem hanging over our heads. It looks bad and is bad for the Democratic party and I blame the party leaders for it.

If Florida had made an effort to fight, they would not have lost their delegates....oh never mind.

by holding primaries that the DNC said would not count toward delegates. These primaries are not about votes. They're about DELEGATES. Who has the most. FL & MI get zero delegates because they didn't play by the rules.

If you want to vote for someone in the general election come the fall, vote for them. If their name is not on the ballot, write it in. Stop this bullshit about how you've been disenfranchised because you can still vote for whoever the fuck you want to come November.

And you know damn well what I meant so stop this bullshit about we weren't disenfranchised. How disingenuous can you be!

...to vote in a primary. If you disagree with the way the Democratic Party has decided to choose its candidate, leave the party.

K & R

I actually think we might lose in November because of just plain hatred spurred by the party leaders here toward the national party, Obama, and Dean.

I do not read the posts as "ugly and vicious" . . . just a different point of view.

Instead of voting 115 to 1 and trying to crash the fundraising of the national party?

Because all that figures in.

The mindless parroting of the "don't take my votes" and yelling "disenfranchisement".....shows that even when one side is right and one is wrong.....the one that is wrong gets all the attention.

if they don't vote Democratic in November, and McCain gets into office.

because of the DNC's silly decision that their rules are more important that the voters in two large states. In the past, the DNC has NEVER taken away the delegates from any state, no matter if they broke the rules or not. This time, for whatever reason, rules are king and F* the voters. FL Dems have taken notice and are pissed, rightly I might add. Dem party has such a talent for self destructing, sad to see them do it again. I will vote Dem, no matter what, but I certainly will never give another dime to the DNC and I gave, for me, quite a bit in the last election cycle. I've had to really talk and talk to my kids to get them to agree to vote Dem and not sit this one out due to their anger at all Dem pols.

Well, after reading the comments above, I'm not so sure.

It seems to be a common theme in this country the past 7 plus years.

Somebody attacks you, you attack whoever's handy.

Are you saying I'm attacking someone?

Indeed, the truth hasn't set some people free.

Several posters on this thread are attacking the DNC and Howard Dean when they should be cleaning house of their state party leaders for screwing them.

Similar to going after Iraq even though it had nothing to do with 9/11.

Just because I will not vote for a FL state incumbent Dem, doesn't mean that Dean's not being an a** too. I don't get a chance to vote him out too or I would.

So let's just be honest.

Blunt, honest. This way someone else had a chance to compete.

and gee whiz, Florida's representatives wouldn't have f'd up everything.

There cannot be any disagreement here? There cannot be another view of what is happening?

Is that what you are suggesting?

are you providing your fact checking to your local media?

That is the tragedy.

Most care - I can pretty much guarantee that.

Perhaps the D's see it a bit differently than you.

I know Madfloridian is.

Disclosure: My profile doesn't tell that I'm from Michigan.

Okay.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:i1Dy8P2UOcoJ:www.d...

one of the cornerstones of the party.

And Dean and the DNC were willing to violate this section.

Punish the state party leaders - not the voters.

I have no idea if it's in effect now or not.

Go here for a link to the link: http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/01/dnc_charter_and.php Go down to link to Democratic Party Charter link.PDF.

It is the inalterable an d inviolable Democratic Party dogma that all members will be guaranteed full and unbiased participation in the nominating process. Change that, and it will be the end of the Democratic Party.

That dogma is being violated right now - and behold, the Democratic Party of 2008 is badly and perhaps permanently and fatally divided.

Democratic Party?

We no longer want to protect equality in voting?

I hope you're giving them an earfull.

I blame both the state and the DNC. They should never, ever have allowed a rule that took away the votes of their members.

"Establish standards and rules of procedure to afford all members of the Democratic Party full, timely, and equal opportunities to participate in decisions concerning selection of the candidates, the formulation of policy, and the conduct of other Party affairs without prejudice . . ."

or worry about wording.

Article 2:

Section 2. The National Convention shall be the highest authority of the Democratic Party, subject to the provisions of this Charter. The National Convention shall recognize the state and other Parties entitled to participate in the conduct of the national affairs of the Democratic Party, including its conventions, conferences and committees. State Party rules or state laws relating to the election of delegates to the National Convention shall be observed unless in conflict with this Charter and other provisions adopted pursuant to authority of the Charter, including the resolutions or other actions of the National Convention. In the event of such conflict with state laws, state Parties shall be required to take provable positive steps to bring such laws into conformity and to carry out such other measures as may be required by the National Convention or the Democratic National Committee.

***************************************************

These states knowingly and deliberately made laws in conflict with the National charter and have not made any 'provable positive steps to bring such laws into conformity'. Evidently the standards and rules do not apply to them.

which disenfranchising party voters certainly is

The leadership of these two states screwed their own constituents. They knew the rules and broke them anyway. Maybe they thought they could get away with it (the Republicans got away with half of it).

having any rule that disenfranchises voters is a crappy rule.

I hold the state and the DNC equally at fault. One of the foundations found in this charter is that voters are treated equally in their voice when it comes to selecting a candidate. The DNC allowed a rule that violated that - and the state supported it.

And the voters got screwed.

And there are too many at this site who are willing to support this disenfranchisement - at the expense of fellow D's. Read the posts in this thread. If there was a rule taking away the voting rights of women and minorities - these followers would be standing in line chanting "it's the rule - it's the rule".

Sad

"If there was a rule taking away the voting rights of women and minorities..."
Bogus. This issue is nothing like taking away the voting rights of women and minorities. These states had the vote but forfeited it. If I steal a car and go to jail - I forfeit my vote. You break the rules - you pay a price. That's the way the system works. And the system only works if the rules are enforced.

The rule doesn't disenfranchise voters. Breaking it does.

I'm not supporting disenfranchisement. I'm supporting having a functioning system. And a functioning system needs rules and regulations. All 50 states signed on to this (and territories etc). Allowing rogue states to make it up as we go along will only harm us in the short and long term. If FL/MI are allowed to get away with it this time, imagine what will happen in 2112?.

But what the hell, screw rules. Who needs them, right!

One last thing. You said "One of the foundations found in this charter is that voters are treated equally in their voice when it comes to selecting a candidate." If two states are allowed to defy that very charter, how is this eqaul treatment? How is this fair to the other 48 states?

If I steal a car and go to jail - I forfeit my vote. You break the rules - you pay a price.

Exactly. And I did not break any rules. You support punishing me by taking away my vote for the action of others. And don't give me this "vote 'em out" crap - no time for that. My voice is not being heard based on the action of power-grabbing party leaders - at both the national and state level.

And I am disenfranchised - so the rule disenfranchises party members.

Functioning system? This is a functioning system? You really believe we have a functioning system?

So what will happen in 2012 (I assume you really do not mean 2112). Anarchy? Same crap as GOP when they discuss same-sex marriage - opens the door to people marrying their pets. Same ol' lame argument.

So you see taking away the votes of a couple of million Democrats as equality? My goodness. And exactly how does offering a voice to Florida and Michigan become unfair to the other states? I fail to understand.

I am only one of many many pissed-off Florida voters. This is not good for the party. EVERYONE needs to be included to resolve this mess. The voters did not create it - they/we should not be paying price.

Apparenly there should be no penalty.

Functioning system? Clearly not. Fair? Hardly - never has been. Anarchy in the system? Maybe.

I'd be pissed too if my "leaders" did this. But chucking out what little organization is left isn't the answer. I doubt the the 30 or 40 million voters of the other 48 states are going feel all that thrilled to know that their following the rules means zilch.

Of course this is all mostly moot anyway since a re-vote is not going to happen and finding a way to fairly count the existing vote is a bit...well...awkward.

of course there should be a penalty - but . . . penalize those responsible - and that is not the voters . . .penalize the state leaders - but count our votes . . . that has been my point for months . . ..

The rule was crappy in that those responsible were not held accountable - the voters were . . .

of course there can be a penalty - but . . . penalize those responsible - not the voters. Penalize the state party, penalize the state party leaders . . . but do not penalize the voters. Count the votes. It was the actions of the party leaders, not the voters, that "broke the rules".

They would have had "full, timely and equal opportunity" had they not decided to break the very rules they (and the other 48 states) agreed to.



Not only were their laws in conflict, but they were deliberately and knowingly in conflict.

It's ironic. In an effort to have more impact on the election, they broke the rules. Had they followed the rules, their primary votes would have had more impact than ever in recent history.

he is on the committee that made the rules and that voted TO sanction Florida and Michigan.

You said in your post something that hit me like a mugger outside Pleasure Island...

It is like there is no truth in this situation, that everyone gets to make their own.

That perfectly explains the contention between the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama activists that has torn apart DU in the last year. Each group of activists are living in their own realities, which deny the validity of the other group's. Neither group has the imagination or the courage to mentally step in the other group's shoes, or to see things from their perspective.

And, although it doesn't apply to the Florida business - since, as I've often said, there IS no Florida Democratic Party, so there are no opponents to the DNC - it does suggest a way out of the Clinton/Obama Blogger War.

Everybody needs to switch sides, if only for a few minutes, and see things from the other side. Honestly, truly and without cynicism. I remember a Twilight Zone episode where, on the last day of World War II, an American who wanted to assault a Japanese squad suddenly changed bodies with the Japanese commander. That's what needs to be done on DU. But I somehow doubt that many people have the courage or imagination to do it.

of others - rather than simply dismissing their views because they are at odds with his.

your statement somewhat reminds me of one thing about media pundits we tend to decry on this site, how they tend to show both sides as equally important or correct when its blatantly obvious that one side is correct and the other is a lie(they do it to seem neutral/balanced)

For some reason your post reminded me of that stance, no offense meant and I'm sure my view is likely a bit biased in this case.

By the time the two of them finish with the primary debacle, even the hard core liberals will have a hard time wanting to be part of the Democratic Party in Florida.

It's the state officials who have disenfranchised them.

If you read any of the links....I point out specific Florida people, I say "Florida leaders".

but f* the voters? Not nice, fair or democratic.

The anger that is directed toward Dean, Obama, and the national party is going to hurt all of us.

We talked to 3 people this week who are for Obama now. Two were Clinton previously, one is a life long Republican. He offered his opinion. We did not bring it up.

But far too many are falling for what the Florida Democratic leaders are saying on TV.

They voted for the bill 115 to 1. They tried to crash DNC fundraising. The party leaders themselves sent out emails attacking Dean.

Now they are trying to make Obama the bad guy.

They need to stop it.

Particularly if a loss in FL and/or MI costs us the GE.

Great job, Howie.

Big tough talk works.

You win.

OMG!

Count my vote.

You might as well have been answering a gallup poll

I don't go to my DNC rule book first.

My mother's family didn't risk their life fleeing the Soviet Union to come to America just to see me not vote in an election I'm eligible to vote in.

In 2004, by the time Florida had its primary, John Kerry was already the presumptive nominee. It didn't matter. I voted anyways.

That pretty well qualifies it as an election to me.

Funny how disenfranchisement is suddenly okay when your candidate is the one to benefit.

(Oh yeah, and for the record, I voted for neither Hillary or Obama. But I still want my vote counted.)

you guys are all whining now but where were you when your leaders were making amendments. you guys sat back and didn't say a peep. mad has been out there since this was going down, while it was going down. she has been putting the word out trying to make a difference. when your voice was needed it was on mute. now you wanna complain that the dnc has disenfranchised you. dr dean has done everything but back flips trying to get your party leaders to come to the table-before the election and after. fl party leaders were scoffing at him. your delegates don't deserve to be seated at the convention. i bet no one will try to leapfrog during the next presidential cycle. thanks florida for another presidential race f_ck up. it is the fault of the people when we don't hold our elected leaders accountable.

And am I so powerful that I could unilateraly change what was done anyways? And what is it of the ordinary citizen that cares or should care as to the order of state primary elections anyways?

Do you realize how stupid you sound? Or are you just so blinded that the ends will always justify the means.

Count my vote.

Pretty sad when all you can say is "count my vote."

Of course, by your logic, if the elected officials during the Jim Crow era didn't repeal prejudicial poll taxes and poll tests, too bad, so sad. As long as it gets your guy elected, that's what matters.

.

...is stupid. I call it like I see it.

It is not the traditional Democratic way of thinking.

And am I so powerful that I could unilateraly change what was done anyways? And what is it of the ordinary citizen that cares or should care as to the order of state primary elections anyways?

Do you realize how stupid you sound? Or are you just so blinded that the ends will always justify the means.

Count my vote.

you could have called your representative and made your voice heard. mad blogs relentlessly she is doing something. you could have written an editorial. you could have talked to other people and deluged your reps w/calls and letters. you are no victim. your reps did not rep you well. the dnc is still trying to help the state of fl and the politicians are still doing nothing. instead of whining on du-call your reps and tell them to get off their behinds and do something. they dug this hole, now tell them to dig you out. it is not the rest of the country's fault.

There are tons and tons of issues way more important than the date of the primary election with which one can preoccupy one's self. Iraq, health care, the economy, etc. If I'm going to contact my representative or write a letter to the editor, there are a lot more worthy topics to do so. Some archaic rule of the DNC about the order of primaries is barely anything to protest.

Like I said, if there's an election, I vote. Now count my vote.

suddenly the rest of the country should care now. all of those things are important-but if your vote didn't matter and you knew it wouldn't-then how could you effect any of those other issues. we all knew the score-this was national news. now you want to have a temper tantrum because you can't get your way. your reps knowingly broke the rules. your silence was taken as affirmation. you knew then your vote didn't count. because you stomp your feet doesn't mean that now your vote counts.

The DNC did that.

I could just as well say that you were negligently silent as the DNC voted to disenfranchise Florida and Michigan voters. Of course, when it's not your vote to be counted, why should you care?

i sent a note requesting that they stand strong on this issue. if fl & mi aren't made examples of, then we will have the problem of all the states trying to leapfrog ahead. i support the rules of my party and i support the dnc.
your reps were there when the rules were made. they voted to pass these rules as well. your reps gambled with your right to vote and everyone lost. stop blaming us for your crappy and selfish reps actions.
our party leaders need to stand behind the dnc and stop this propaganda war in its tracks. florida was not a victim but a wiling participant in this fiasco.