There is only One conceivable way to resolve Florida an Michigan

[Perky]

Poll question: There is only One conceivable way to resolve Florida an Michigan

As an Obama support I have always been willing to concede the point that FL/MI voters should have the voices heard in Denver. THey should not be penalized by the machinations of the state party leaders. And while I think the popular vote is not representative of what the results of a full throated vigorous and well organized campaign in either state would be; given that a new election is not possible, there is no choice but to let those results stand.

But to seat the entire delegation without penalty does a disservice to the process the DNC instituted and the states agreed to.. There has to be a penalty and it has to be substantial, but it can not penalizes the voters in the states.

1. Seat the Pledged Delegates
2. Penalize Florida by stripping them of 1/2 of the Super Delegates (because they supported the GOP efforts to change the date).
3. Penalize Michigan by not allowing their Super Delegates to vote on the first ballot (because the state party made a mockery or ght process they agreed to)
4. Neither state can hold their primaries in 2012 before April 1, 2012

This gives Clinton her argument that the voters must be heard, and penalizes the state party for breaking ranks.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. MIchigan? Obama was not on the ballot.

That is one bullshit option there.

How about seat them. split their delegates 50-50 between Obama and Clinton?

[Perky]

4. It is a belll that can not be unrung

Any split of the plesged delgates that dimishise the net result for CLinton is unfair to Clinton all esles is conjecture. the 55 uncommitted are effectively uncommitted super I just do not see anyway around it.

[purji]

28. Mi. election was ruled unconstitutional

I really don't think it sets a good tone if we start using unconstitutional elections.

[dkf]

2. You think they will honor a promise not to vote before April 1?

Their word isn't worth a dime.

[Perky]

8. They would get the death penalty if they did

besides the 2012 election will hopefully be a non-contested affainr beecause we hole the presidency anyway.

[dkf]

10. Yeah but you set precedent.

Any big state can lose half their delegates and still have more than Iowa and NH.

We need to set the precedent that any state that moves up without permission gets the death penalty. Then we won't have this problem.

[Tyler Durden]

12. Do that. We NEED a solid third party.

More BS from DNC Dean and the DLC Cabal is all that's need to make the Schism permanent.

I like this. Hell, I LOVE this. LET ALL THE POISONS THAT LURK IN THE MUD HATCH OUT!

[Perky]

13. The problem is that a state party is not soley responsible for when the primary is held.

If the state has two primary dates it is very expensive. And if the GOP want an eraly date and controlss the state leguislature...it makes it even harder. That is why FLorida does not get the same penalty as Michigan.

[DemVet]

3. Seat the entire delegation from both states.

Never again will the Democratic Party be able to say: "Count Every Vote."

It's utterly ridiculous to penalize the citizens of these states just because they wanted to have more of a chance to affect the outcome of the primary process.

I blame Howard Dean...he should resign. He's been made to look like a fool by the Republican Legislatures in these states that orchestrated this chaos.

[RazBerryBeret]

6. if MI and FL gets away with the early vote

there will be an avalanche of states trying the same stunt in 2012. I think Ohio should be earlier too.
there should be some consequence to not following the rules, otherwise, why do we have rules?

[DemVet]

States should try this "stunt"

[cali]

7. LOL. Yes of course you want Obama to get no votes and no delegates

out of Michigan. You're completely desperate. Gives lie to any claims about caring about "disenfranchised" voters though, because clearly many people were indeed voting for Obama when they voted uncommitted. Must suck the big one for you to know MI will not be seated completely in Hilly's favor. Never gonna happen. Must also suck for you to know that Dean is being widely lauded for his leadership.

[DemVet]

21. "many people were indeed voting for Obama when they voted uncommitted"

That's just as ridiculous as trying to determine voter intent from "pregnant," "bulging," and "hanging" chads.

[cali]

24. no, it's not. It's simply stating the obvious.

there's a shitload of anecdotal evidence to back it up, and polls. Do you really think that AA voters in Detroit were Hilly supporters? Please.

[DemVet]

36. So you admit AA votes are racially motivated? Nice!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

26. Although I'm "for" Obama now,

my "uncommitted" vote was for Edwards.

I think MI delegates can be seated, but with no voting rights. They can yell, and wave signs, cheer for the winner, drink cheap liquor, whatever else delegates do, but their vote should not be counted.

:party:

[cali]

31. Really? So you actually think the large AA voting bloc was for

Edwards? I doubt it.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

34. Maybe for Huckabee, I don't know

I don't remember the details of exit polling for the non-counting-primary, or any breakdown by race, gender, education, income. I don't know how big the AA bloc was. Do you have a link?

I only know who I voted for. And what the party can do with MI's delegate vote.

[DemVet]

37. That's like going to a beer party and having to drink soda.

Or going on a date with your sibling.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

40. MI Delegates? No, they will not be drinking soda!

Maybe Scotch and soda!

They can go, not vote, and they'll still get to put their faces on television, which is mostly what they want to do anyway.

They might even get bonus air time because of the controversy. Excellent! It's good to be a MI delegate!

I think they'll probably go, with voting rights of some kind, as some kind of show of reconciliation. Obama's lead will be so insurmoutable that it won't matter... for THIS election cycle. But if they're allowed to vote, it could set a bad precedent for 2012.

[bowens43]

16. what is ridiculous is seating the delegates from states that violate the rules.

To reward their actions would be the height of hypocrisy and would forever taint the primary process.

[DemVet]

22. Yeah, let's penalize the Democratic electorate of a state...

...where the Republican-controlled legislature determined whether the DNC rules would be followed.

That makes real sense. :eyes:

[mmonk]

19. Why have rules or the DNC then?

Everybody do what the hell they want?

[DemVet]

23. Did you say that about the other states that "followed" the rules?

[mmonk]

25. No. Why would I?

I like some rules and order compared to chaos and political expediency.

[IsItJustMe]

27. The states are responsible for this, not Dean. The DNC is the victim, not the perpatrator here.

[Apollo11]

5. Your point 2 is impractical

Who would decide which of Florida's superdelegates should be told they cannot vote at the Convention?

One solution would be to count each of the superdelegates votes as half a vote. They could do this for Florida and Michigan.

I see no reason to exclude Florida's pledged delegates. Now that John Edwards is in the Obama camp, I guess Florida's pledged delegates could reasonably be split equally between Clinton and Obama.

In Michigan if you give the uncommitteds to Obama then Hillary could still claim a net gain of 18 delegates. The Clinton campaign has rejected a "compromise" that would shrink their net gain from 18 down to 10.

Speculating about all this is kind of pointless, because the Rules Committee will hopefully deal with it all on May 31st.

[MaineDem]

9. They'd each get half a vote. n/t

[Spider Jerusalem]

11. There are already existing rules in place.

Which state that both states would lose half their delegates and all of their superdelegates. This is probably the best solution, and I expect it's likely what will happen when the status of these delegations is voted on.

[Perky]

15. My concern is that such a result would mean a flloor fight

[Spider Jerusalem]

17. No, it wouldn't

the math isn't there for Clinton under that scenario; the math isn't there for her under the one you propose either. There will be no floor fight, and it won't go past the first ballot (if indeed it goes as far as the convention, which it won't). Not to mention that the solution I outlined is the one established by already-existing rules. (Ones which Senator Clinton implicitly agreed to, remember, when she pledged not to campaign in either state.)

[bowens43]

14. There is already a solution in place. Agreed to by both candidates.

[phrigndumass]

18. The supers from FL and MI won't be allowed a vote at all ...

... and the pledged will be seated with half-votes. It's up to the campaigns in conjunction with a recommendation by the Rules Committee to offer to the Credentials Committee how to split the half-votes.

This is according to Rule 20.C.1.a.:

20.C.1.a. Violation of timing: In the event the Delegate Selection Plan of a state party provides or permits a meeting, caucus, convention or primary which constitutes the first determining stage in the presidential nominating process to be held prior to or after the dates for the state as provided in Rule 11 of these rules, or in the event a state holds such a meeting, caucus, convention or primary prior to or after such dates, the number of pledged delegates elected in each category allocated to the state pursuant to the Call for the National Convention shall be reduced by fifty (50%) percent, and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by fifty (50%) percent. In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation. In determining the actual number of delegates or alternates by which the state’s delegation is to be reduced, any fraction below .5 shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number, and any fraction of .5 or greater shall be rounded up to the next nearest whole number.

(emphasis mine)

- Phrig

[Perky]

29. Thanks

So on that basis:

The currenty numbers

Clinton Obama
Today 1717 1888
Needed 308 137


Follwoing the rules:
Clinton Obama
Today 1717 1888
MI (1/2) 36.5 27.5
FL (1/2) 52.5 33.5
1806 1949
Needed 286 143

[phrigndumass]

43. Exactly, and we can go a little further with projections ...

Clinton:
Need 286
33 Kentucky
20 Oregon
31 Puerto Rico
8 Montana
6 South Dakota
20 add-on supers from states won
Still Need: 168

Obama:
Need 143
18 Kentucky
32 Oregon
24 Puerto Rico
8 Montana
9 South Dakota
26 add-on supers from states won
Still Need: 26

In this new scenario (the best Senator Clinton can hope for), Senator Obama will still have the majority of pledged delegates and this will set off the Pelosi Club superdelegate endorsements.

The Obama campaign will make counter-arguments at the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee meeting on May 31, and it would be possible that the RBC would recommend to the Credentials Committee that neither state's results could be deemed accurate. The only way to certify compliance, then, would be to halve the delegates and split them 50/50.

Instead of 89 total for Clinton, she would receive 78 (-11). Instead of 61 for Obama, he would receive 78 (+17). Thus:

Clinton Still Need: 179
Obama Still Need: 9

Edwards' 19 pledged delegates may very well support Obama, following Edwards' endorsement. Also, there are currently 6 known unpledged supers in the Pelosi Club.

Obama Need: 9
Add 19
Add 6

Obama Over: 16

Then there's the 5 supers each day that have been endorsing Obama on top of that ...

:hi:

[mmonk]

20. The question is, what would the Hillary campaign's position be

if it were reversed? Think it would be the same as now? About as likely a snowball lasting in hell for a thousand years.

[Bolo Boffin]

30. I'm actually open to a lot of options

But Florida and Michigan's seating should not decide the nomination. Neither should it put a nomination into jeopardy. Any plan that gives them a voice besides that is fine with me.

I would actually be a little harsher. 50% of pledged delegates and no super delegates this time around. The primary dates should be a separate issue. In fact, an earlier date for Florida and Michigan in 2012 might be a nice carrot to take their medicine on this go-around.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[Tommy_Carcetti]

33. I'm an Edwards voter (from Florida) and your proposal sounds fair.

It punishes the state officials without interfering with our (the Florida voters') popular choice.

Good thinking. I hope something like this gets proposed.

[NotThisTime]

35. What about the people who did not vote because they knew their vote wasn't being counted?

There are a lot of people in Florida who did not vote. There was a large voting block of homeowners because there was a homeowners tax/insurance credit on the ballot. People who rented stayed home. How do you rectify this?

A 50-50 split, that's it. You have no idea who might have come out if indeed everyone thought their vote counted.

[backscatter712]

38. There was opportunity to throw new primaries in MI and FL.

Y'know, something that was actually fair, where all the candidates that wanted to participate could be on the ballot, where everyone actively campaigned, and every voter who wanted to come out and vote could do so knowing it will be counted.

They didn't take that opportunity, instead squandering it in petty squabbling.

So the voters are screwed.

And fundamentally, seating any pledged delegates that came from those flawed, unfair elections would be just as disenfranchising as not seating them at all. At least by not seating them, we're being honest about it.

MI and FL voters. You want my advice? Take your anger out on your state legislators this November in the general election. They're the fuckers who created this mess and should pay the price.

[Romulox]

41. Barack Obama refused to agree to a revote, unless it was open to people who voted in the REPUBLICAN

primary.

Quit lecturing and start reading. :hi:

[Perky]

44. In Michigan. Where there was crossover voting

but like I said it is a bnell that cant' be iunrung. I think the vote as is is mildly uinfair to Obama....but the idea of revoting is academic exercise in futility

[ieoeja]

39. I am for Obama, and have another idea. Use auto-punishment.

It is likely Michigan did this expecting the automatic punishment: elected delegate votes count 1/2; all super delegates banned from the convention.

They probably did not expect the Rules & Bylaws Committee to hit them with an optional harsher punishment. At this point, I say commute their sentence to the above.

Do the same for Florida. Some of those Florida Democrats have made it clear they hate the Democratic Party outside of Florida. But the ones I hear expressing those sentiments are the Super Delegates. Since the automatic punishment calls for their ban from the convention, I would be perfectly happy with that while going ahead and seating the delegates the people of Florida voted for.

[TahitiNut]

42. Bullshit. There is NO 'SOLUTION'! It's a FUBAR.

No campaign spending. No facing the voters. They didn't EARN shit! The appalling PRETENSE of sending some party insiders for a vacation in Denver has absolutely nothing to do with honoring or respecting the voters of Michigan! It's an obscene, self-serving Kabuki ... and it does NOTHING to address the issues that have caused Michigan to have the HIGHEST rate of unemployment and the region with the HIGHEST rate of foreclosures!