MI/FL solution: 50/50 split on pledged delegates, Supers not allowed to vote.

[rinsd]

Poll question: MI/FL solution: 50/50 split on pledged delegates, Supers not allowed to vote.

There has been alot of discussion about seating the pledged delegates of MI & FL and doing so in near 50/50 splits.

I agree with this for the purpose of getting the delegates seated and beginning the healing process with those state's parties.

However, I think those states should not have the privilege of their Superdelegate votes being counted.

So basically MI & FL in terms of delegates have zero effect on the nominee and the party members in charge of this fiasco would be punished instead of the voters.

What say you DU?

[ingac70]

1. Rules are rules...

and we can't go breaking them for whiny butts after they agreed to this punishment.

[Hepburn]

15. I agree....

...if this time two states get away with whining and bitching, what happends next time?

Rules are rules.

[Secret_Society]

17. Yea rules are rules, BUT

according to the DNC Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina also broke the rules by moving up their elections. In response, according to DNC Rules, those states along with Florida and Michigan should have had a 50% reduction in their delegation. I don't understand why Florida and Michigan were punished beyond what the rules required and other states got off with no penalty? The rules are actually being broken by the current stance of the DNC.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5730339&mesg_id=5730339

[Pirate Smile]

2. I'd love it. I think the SuperD's should really be the ones punished but I don't

think they will ever agree to not have a vote. IMO They care more about their votes then their state delegations.

I love it but the Clinton camp would absolutely despise this deal.

[bowens43]

3. No, need. It was settled before the pimaries began.

[LisaM]

4. No, I don't agree.

I don't like how Howard Dean gamed it so that these two states couldn't move up their primaries, but South Carolina and Nevada could. I did a little calculating yesterday. The population of Idaho, Nevada, Wyoming, Alaska, and three others that I can't remember now COMBINED were 4 million less than the population of Ohio. Michigan and Florida are big states that had a good chance of going for Hillary (I think Michigan had a good chance of seating some Edwards delegates) and Dean wrote them off in favor of states that gave Obama an early lead in the game. Perception is everything. I know Nevada went for Hillary, but Obama got more delegates out of it, and because of the shenanigans in letting the union that endorsed Obama caucus while they were actually at work, Hillary got some really bad press, even though it was the teacher's union, not she, who objected to the casino workers getting this advantage (to my knowledge, they are the only people in the entire country allowed to caucus on the job).

[AllentownJake]

6. So in August of 2007

Before Obama was polling above 15%-20% and was pretty much in a tie with Edwards for 2nd

Howard Dean plotted with the Obama campaign to punish the Hillary campaign :tinfoilhat:

Why did Hillary agree they wouldn't count than? She must have been aware of thie nefarious plot if it was organized so long ago.

[LisaM]

8. I didn't say that. I said the way it worked out, it favored Obama.

If Michigan and Florida had been given the early vote instead of South Carolina and Nevada, we would be looking at a very different picture.

Not to mention that both Michigan and Florida are vastly more important in the GE.

[AllentownJake]

11. Do you understand

The reasoning. They wanted smaller states for retail campaigning. Hard to do that in states with populations like MI and Florida.

They wanted a southern state, a midwestern state, a new england state, and a mountain state.

It worked out to be SC, Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada.

they did it so all minority groups would have a say in the early voting.

[LisaM]

18. New Hampshire and Iowa have always gone first.

So we can leave them out of the picture.

Yes, I understand the reasoning. I don't agree with it. But regardless of that, it still favored Obama as it turned out.

[AllentownJake]

29. The campaigns

Knew for almost a year what states were and their orders. She ran a crappy campaign in Iowa, a good one in NH, a really bad one in SC, and a decent one in NV. It was a 2-2 split. How did that favor Obama?

If she would have won in Iowa...this would have been over in the first week in January.

[Orangepeel]

24. states had apply to move their primaries. SC and Nev did and were chosen.

Florida didn't even bother to apply.

[dchill]

38. "Howard Dean gamed it..."

Not.

[yourguide]

5. The supers in either state should not be allowed to vote

for contributing to this situation.

[izzybeans]

7. I don't see any reason to strip the supers if they are going to split the pledged delegates.

That is, if they are going to seat those delegates isn't there an obligations to the supers as well? I'm not sure.

Maybe they will counter balance the bs that began with the republican state legislature meddling in our election.

[newmajority]

9. Although they did break the rules, and deserve to be punished, this solution seems fair.

Funny thing is, the Obama campaign proposed a 50/50 split, and Team Hillary rejected it. She actually believes she should be able to claim the illegitimate primary results as valid, and that's why this situation remains unresolved.

Howard Dean obviously thinks there's a way to seat the delegates in Denver. He said so last night on the Daily Show. But I know there's no way he's going to let an illegitimate primary determine the outcome of this race.

This solution seems workable to me. Punish the state parties who created the situation, but allow the peoples' delegates to participate.

[rocktivity]

10. PLAGARIST! I thought of that months ago, LOL!

But seriously, folks, I think it's the fairest thing to do all around--it punishes the guilty without totally disenfranchising the voters or undermining the authority of DNC.

:headbang:
rocknation

[rinsd]

12. Great minds and all that jazz

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4915950&mesg_id=4927476

[MarvelousMellifluous]

13. What jazz

[rocktivity]

32. I'm a metalhead myself

Welcome to DU, Marvelous!

:hi:
rocknation

[dchill]

14. Excuse me - what were those rules, again?

:shrug:

[rinsd]

16. Do you want to lose Florida in the GE? Do you want to lose MI in the GE?

A solution has to be found to get the delegates seated.

[dchill]

19. Excuse me - but what were those rules, again?

If the delegations are seated, then that's a signal that next time, there really are no rules. I'm sorry, but that's a fact that the PTB will HAVE to consider. Any seating of those delegates that accrues more to one candidate than to the other will cause more trouble, not less.

[rinsd]

23. Howard Dean recognizes the danger in not seating the delegates.

Saying rules are rules will be of little comfort with McCain in the White House.

[dchill]

26. I get it.

Rules AREN'T rules when it comes to Hillary. Got it. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[rinsd]

27. What does Hillary have to do with this?

Did you even read the OP that calls for a 50/50 split and therefore ZERO effect on the nomination?

That seating these delegates is important to the GE?

Or are you simply so mindless you stick in Hillary rants wherever you post?

[dchill]

30. Oh, I could have sworn the OP said "near 50/50 splits"...

I guess that made me think of the proposed splits I heard about yesterday that favored Clinton in both states. If you say "near 50/50", then it doesn't sound quite like ZERO effect to me. Sounds like "actually favors Clinton but never mind about that" to me. That's what I'm talking about. I didn't vote in your poll, and that's the reason. Even Clinton supporters on DU like to preload their votes. Either you are saying "ZERO effect" or you are saying "near 50/50 split" - it's NOT the same thing. ZERO effect would be fine with me, because that would denote a measure of punishment to the offending states, but "near 50/50" would mean no such thing.

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything."
Let's remember that.

[rinsd]

31. That was in reference to the discussions taking place. Look at the subject line.

As there have been variations on the splits.

I, personally, have been calling for a 50/50 split for months.

There's also this

"So basically MI & FL in terms of delegates have zero effect on the nominee"

[dchill]

33. "near 50/50 splits" - "basically ... zero effect"

You need to get real. You're being somewhat deliberately vague, I feel. Either it's 50/50, zero effect, or it's near 50/50, basically zero effect.
Try two separate poll questions based on those two possibilities (the answers to which would be interesting), and you'll have credibility - otherwise, it's politics as usual.

[rinsd]

37. I think nearly everyone here took my meaning as a 50/50 split with no Super vote.

And voted so based on that feeling.

So what are you accusing me of?

Using loaded questionbs to push poll people to um....call for a 50/50 split and no Supers vote?

:shrug:

Or are you upset that the validity of a DU poll may be in question? :rofl:

[HockeyMom]

21. You lost Florida a long time ago

It is a hopeless state.

[rinsd]

28. I'm not ready to give up on FL.

[Innocent Smith]

20. No

Your solution is probably better than most, but the problem is that there really isn't a solution outside of having the states vote again.

Either count real votes or don't. But don't come up with a magic fair 50/50 split and pretend that that is same as having people actually voting. Rather than respecting democracy; it makes a mockery of it.

The problem with MI is that without Obama on the ballot there aren't any real Obama vs. Clinton votes to count.

[Orangepeel]

22. that's the opposite of what WILL happen, unfortunately

the superdelegates will vote.

[graycem]

25. That's the only fair solution

that doesn't favor either of them, and doesn't slight FL/MI voters.

[Hoof Hearted]

34. That isn't counting them at all. No.

[Romulox]

35. Nonsensical non-solution. What you propose is the same as excluding the delegates.

It's undemocratic and illogical.

[Lucinda]

36. Split MI , seat FL as they voted. Strip all the supers from both states.