It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (Updated)

One woman (or man) - one vote.

That's the rock-solid foundation our nation has stood upon for generations.

Voting rights are something Democrats have fought long and hard for when it comes to our brothers and sisters all over the country.  If someone tries to disenfranchise another citizen, Democrats are the first to do something about it.  We've fought long and hard to get rid of literacy tests, poll taxes, and dirty games at the polling stations when Republicans try to keep folks from voting.  Hillary's shown her commitment to this ideal all along, starting with her efforts to register voters in Texas some 35 years ago.

We were also the ones who fought to keep the vote-counting going down in Florida in 2000 when Katherine Harris tried to steal the election.  Several times we thought we'd headed her off at the pass only to have the Supreme Court scuttle our efforts.  We still spit her name whenever someone mentions her - she stole an election and for that we'll never forgive her.

So given this long history of our party's fight for voting rights, how is it that our own party leaders are now trying to disenfranchise millions of fellow-Democrats in Florida and Michigan (my home state)?

The campaign held one of their regular press conference calls this morning and I was fortunate enough to be at my desk at the time, so I listened in.  A big part of the call centered around what they hope to see happen when the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) meets in DC on May 31st.  Here's a YouTube audio of the introductory remarks of the call...


(Thanks to No Quarter for getting this up on line)

So about those lawsuits mentioned in the above call... Several news outlets in Florida are covering a challenge from three superdelegates in the Sunshine State.  From today's Miami Herald...

Democrats file suit to seat Florida delegates

Florida's history of discrimination against African Americans should force the national Democratic Party to count all of the state's delegates at its national convention, a federal lawsuit filed Thursday claims.

The suit, filed by state Senate Democratic Leader Steve Geller and two other Democrats, claims that the federal Voting Rights Act prohibits the national party from stripping the state of its convention delegates.

The Civil Rights-era law requires the U.S. Justice Department to approve any significant voting change in Florida to make sure it doesn't disenfranchise minority voters. Geller argues that includes the Democratic National Committee's demand that Florida switch ''from a state-run primary to party-run caucus system'' to avoid losing its delegates.

''The purpose of this lawsuit is not to support one candidate over another; it's to enforce one of the most basic tenets of our democracy: Count the votes as they were cast,'' Geller said in announcing the lawsuit.

Now we're all clear on the initial reason the DNC handed down this severe and extreme punishment - Florida moved its primary up and when the Dems couldn't convince the Republican controlled state legislature to move it back, the DNC stripped them of their delegates.  All of them.  Add to that the further "insult" that Florida refused to replace the votes of those 1.75 million Floridians with a caucus vote, and I'll bet the DNC powers-that-be (Donna Brazile being one of them) had steam comin' out of their ears.  But the thing is, they would have replaced the will of those 1.75 million voters with the wishes of caucus goers.  And they figured there would only be about 10 percent turnout in those caucuses. And there would have only been about 120 polling places.  These caucuses would have excluded the infirm, the elderly, anyone who works at the appointed time of the caucus, members of our military serving outside the state, parents with young children who can't get childcare... the list goes on and on and on gang.

Now I ask you... is this fair given the fact that those 1.75 million voters didn't have a say in when their primary was held in the first place?  This push to not count all the votes as they were cast... is this what Democrats now stand for????

In addition to Geller, who is an uncommitted super-delegate, plaintiffs include a Florida delegate for Hillary Clinton, Barbara Effman and one for Barack Obama, Percy Johnson.

snip

Geller believes the strongest argument Florida Democrats have in the legal challenge is how it relates to Section Five of the Voting Rights Act. The 1965 act was designed to protect blacks, primarily in southern states, from discrimination by banning literacy tests, poll taxes and unfair redistricting that had denied them access to the voting booths.

Another Florida website out of Tampa Bay also covered this lawsuit...

Fla. delegates sue DNC

Three Florida Democratic delegates to the party's presidential nominating convention have sued their national party in another attempt to get the state's Jan. 29 renegade primary recognized.

snip

Click here to read a letter sent today by Sen. Geller to the Democratic National Committee.

snip

"The (Democratic National Committee) believes that although nearly 1,750,000 of the more than 4,000,000 registered Florida Democrats voted in the Primary for one of the Democrats named on the ballot, the DNC - irrespective of the Timing Rule or any other rule, state law, or the U.S. Constitution - never has to count a vote cast in a presidential preference primary," the suit says.

snip

The state party used the Jan. 29 primary to allocate 185 delegates, with 105 pledged to Clinton, 67 backing Obama and 13 for John Edwards. There are 26 unpledged super delegates - elected officials, party executives and other bigwigs - that are also not recognized in the state's delegation.

That bolded bit above...?  Gang they had a nearly 50% turnout in a primary that people said wouldn't count.  Doesn't that tell you someing????

The article goes on to say that the state party has a hearing on May 31st with the DNC, in which they'll try to get the delegations seated at half strength.  Not an option in my book - that's like saying the citizens of Florida and Michigan (my home state) are only entitled to half the representation the rest of us enjoy and that's NOT what the Democratic party is all about.

Funny, the basis for this suit appears to be the disenfranchisement of minorities in Florida, and it relies on the Voting Rights Act - something that ALL Democrats can agree is one of the most important laws of the 20th century.  How anyone - especially a candidate for the Democratic Party's nomination in this presidential race - could argue against including all votes is beyond me.  

This whole thing raises an important question that I think we all need to consider here guys...  If BO manages to scuttle the seating of ALL of the delegates from these two vital swing states (in accordance with the express wishes of 2.3 million voters, then how exactly will he be able to claim he's the nominee of all of us?  This 48 plus two halfs state strategy just won't cut it with the voters in Michigan (my home state) and Florida guys.  Something that was so wisely pointed out on Anglachel's blog...

http://anglachelg.blogspot.com/2008/05/l egitimacy-not-unity.html

The increasing rejection of Obama by voters is a measure of his declining legitimacy. People who once thought they would gladly vote for him, like me, are now implacably opposed to him. He is no longer legitimate in our eyes. He has not sought legitimacy, which would mean facing up to oposition and allowing himself to be challenged, questioned, and probably be found wanting by some people, but has opted to pursue power at any price. Participating in and profiting from the media hatred of the Clintons, throwing out accusations of racism to try to forestall criticism and inflate AA vote counts, encouraging people to be "Obamacans" not Democrats, the "Democrat for a Day" strategy, engaging in intimidation and threats to extract caucus votes, aggressively trying to monopolize money specifically to silence alternative voices, and treating voters who do not choose him first with contempt.

Lack of legitimacy means relying on force to win. If you have to bully people to make them be quiet, you have lost legitimacy. If you have to remove votes from the contest in order to win, you have lost legitimacy.

snip

You gain legitimacy by being willing to risk power. This is the root cause of Obama's failure to be a unifying figure even as he preaches Unity.

Now part of her post references something that was posted over at the Confluence by River Daughter.  These wise women raise a relevant point gang.  Why not do the right thing and afford the voters of Michigan (my home state) and Florida full representation at our party's convention this summer?
Tuesday Bird Brains

Who is giving them permission to set aside their ethics and shuffle off the standards of acceptable behavior? Who is running the party that allows for the brutal suppression of one half by the unleashed id of the other half? I put the blame at the top of the party and Obama himself.

There is a price to be paid for such aggressive and insensitive behavior. People do have free will. The party belongs to the people who believe in its principles. Those principles of social justice, equality and shared responsibility can not be discarded for Change! without the party suffering some severe blows to its foundation. Going forward, the party becomes a fragile shell, easily blown to bits by outside forces because its foundations of support have been carelessly undermined.

Armando raised a great point in this morning's press call - something I would think BO and his camp would have already considered and run with...

If he goes along with the seating of ALL of the delegates from Florida and Michigan (my home state) it would certainly add a degree of legitimacy to his campaign should he prevail and win the nomination in August.  If he agreed to play fair re the 2.3 million voters who turned out in those primaries, then that would take away a huge point in Hillary's favor at the moment.  She won't be able to advocate for the rights of those voters, because they'll all be on the same page in this effort.  

I would have added one other point on that score...

If BO's so certain of winning the nomination then WHY is he so worried about seating all of those delegates?  Hmmmmm????

And then someone else on that conference call rolled in with the usual "what if you don't get all you want?  What will you do then?" bs.

Guys this is NOT a question of what Hillary wants.  It's about defining our party going forward.  Are we a party that pushes for FULL INCLUSION?

For voting rights?  

For an open and fair election?  

Because if we are then the only true course of action is to seat ALL of the delegates as apportioned and certified by the people of Florida and Michigan (my home state).  

Here's the thing gang... millions of people live in those two states and dammit 2.3 million people turned out to vote in these elections.  This was a record setting year in Florida despite the fact that people were telling them not to bother - that it wouldn't count.  They voted anyway because they wanted to exercise their constitutional rights as citizens of this great land.  They're our family and friends and they deserve the same rights as we do.  Not because someone granted them to them - but because they've earned it.

Real people.

My family.

My mom and step-dad.  My bother and his family.  My sisters and their families.  Uncles, aunts, cousins... real people who deserve a voice in this election.

I mean we ARE still DEMOCRATS - right????

As far as Florida and Michigan (my home state) go, the way each candidate handled everything in Michigan points to a very stark difference in their leadership style, and to their devotion to the idea that we all get an equal say in how we're governed...

Hillary stood before the voters in Michigan

Obama blew them off with his games and one-upsmanship in order to kiss up to the voters in IA, and it paid off for him.

She was also willing to stand before the voters in Michigan AGAIN - she was that confident that she could reach out to enough of them to earn their support and their vote.  

BO stood in the way of that re-vote - despite the fact that one of the proposals was to re-vote by a mail-in ballot (a plan or legislation that he actually co-sponsored as a Senator).  So you have to ask what exactly he's afraid of in Michigan.  Why won't he go before the voters there and ask them to support his run for the White House, especially if he's so confident of victory in Denver?

She's got the guts to stand up and ask for votes - he doesn't.

SHE'S on the side of full inclusion - he's talking about cutting their votes in half or splitting things down the middle (contrary to the expressed wishes of the voters).

Now which one sounds like a true leader and a DEMOCRAT?

Gang the renegade states have already been punished by the candidates refusal to campaign in their states.  Michigan's economy is crap so that hit them hard.  

It's time to move on and seat the delegates.

It's time Democrats started acting like Democrats again.

UPDATE

Wow. In looking through the comments here I've gotta say I'm shocked. Shocked to see a handful of angry people work so hard to disrupt a discussion about something that we Democrats have stood strong for over decades of hard work. Going back to the fight to gain suffrage for AAs and women.

To the distupters here I've got one thing to say... this is about voting rights and if you can't see that then there's no helping you.

Ok two things... If this is the change and hope your guy keeps blathering on about without really defining it - exclusion and disenfranchisement of millions of Americans then you can freaking keep it. I for one (and I'm sure I'm not alone in this) don't want any part in your struggle to keep the people of Michigan (my home state) and Florida out of this process.

You tell Michigan (my home state) and Florida to eff off then you're setting us up for certain failure come November.

As far as I'm concerned, your struggle centers around taking away a basic right in our society - the right to vote and be heard as we select our nect leader. This is NOT the Democratic party I grew up with and have worked so hard for since 1971.

You know what to do.

HELP HILLARY FIGHT ON - CONTRIBUTENOW!



Display:


Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.65 / 29)

Democrats include EVERY VOTE - according to the wishes of the voter.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:05:11 PM EST

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.70 / 17)

Anything less and that makes us no better than the Republicants.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:05:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.73 / 15)

You know what to do - donate now - see sig line.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:06:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.88 / 9)

Why did you feel the need to write the first four comments to your own diary?


UNITY!
by The Great Gatsby on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:11:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hold a gun to alegre's head (1.66 / 3)

and make her do it every damn day :p~


by phoenixdreamz on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:35:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

anya109, why did you TR me? (none / 0)

Any excuse to back hand a Hillary supporter I guess. Whatever.


by phoenixdreamz on Fri May 23, 2008 at 11:37:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama TRrolls (2.00 / 1)

Par for the course. Look at the people who abused MyDD guidelines to troll or zero rate Alegre's comment:

"Democrats include EVERY VOTE - according to the wishes of the voter."

bobdoleisevil 1
vbdietz 1
Pat Flatley 1
Why Not 0
chicagovigilante 0
coffeetalk 1
LtWorf 1
RockvilleLiberal2 1
Deadalus 0

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/5/22/2 2423/6239/1?mode=alone;showrate=1#1


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Fri May 23, 2008 at 02:25:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.50 / 4)

So she can get more Recs from her fellow Kool-Aid guzzlers.

This is fantastic news for HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!


by Deano963 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:39:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She wrote the first three. (none / 0)

If you're going to be childish, at least be accurate.


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:11:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She wrote the first three. (1.50 / 2)

Hi.

1.  I will remember that asking simple questions like "Why did you post so many comments" is "childish".  Geez, why must I be so juvenile.

2.  Alegre posted three comments in one "thread" of replies (a reply to her reply to her original comment), plus another, unrelated comment.  This is true even if they appear to be more spread out now.

1+1+1+1=4


UNITY!
by The Great Gatsby on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:17:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You can't count, can you? Poor thing! (1.00 / 1)

Or haven't you gotten to addition yet in grade school?


by CoyoteCreek on Fri May 23, 2008 at 10:23:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You can't count, can you? Poor thing! (2.00 / 1)

Was it really necessary to type such a childish insult 12 hours after his post was made?



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Fri May 23, 2008 at 10:30:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Just trying to point out possible (none / 0)

self-improvements for the little kid.


by CoyoteCreek on Fri May 23, 2008 at 11:17:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.88 / 9)

Considering how deeply she's in debt, maybe you need to make your sig line bigger.

Or sell you bike and your X-Box.


by BlueinColorado on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:18:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.75 / 4)

Why do you always respond to your own post two times when you could just put all three one-liners in the same post?


by Deano963 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:37:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.83 / 6)

Because then she'd only get the mojo for one post.  Why accept one post's mojo when you have three whole sentences, each of which deserves mojo on its own?


Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.
by mistersite on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:39:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Alegre was from Maryland at Daily Kos. (1.80 / 5)

I guess she's from Michigan now; taking a leaf from Senator Clinton's book.


by bobdoleisevil on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:14:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Alegre was from Maryland at Daily Kos. (1.57 / 7)

LOL.......In a couple weeks we'll discover that she spent part of her childhood in Billings and her summers camping out in Sioux(sp?) Falls.


by Deano963 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:20:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Michigan (my home state, too) (1.00 / 1)

deserves to be counted as is - the same as Florida.

Hey Obamacots...what are you afraid of?


by CoyoteCreek on Fri May 23, 2008 at 10:22:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Michigan (my home state, too) (2.00 / 1)

I fear insomnia.



McCain
by Black Anus on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:29:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 16)

Really?


"The best way to show that a stick is crooked is not by arguing about it or spending time denouncing it, but to lay a straight stick alongside it" -DL Moody
by nextgen on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:46:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 6)

OUCH.

But that's not what Alegre said - who you gonna believe, Alegre or your lyin' eyes?


by grover738 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:34:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's BURMA STYLE DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.25 / 8)

when only the most conniving candidate's name remained on the ballot in Michigan.

I'm sure a faux democrat (small d) like Alegre was thrilled to have a one candidate election in her state. No doubt she would approve of the recent election in Burma too.

Hillary's cynical self serving ploy in Michigan, and her repeated bald faced lies about leading in the popular vote should be enough to disqualify her from the presidency in a country sick and tired of lies emanating from the White House, a White House that also doesn't feel bound by rules.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:02:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: OBAMA STYLE DEMOCRACY (1.50 / 2)

It was hardly the voters' fault for getting caught in the middle of some political power play. And only a "conniving" politician would seriously believe you could exclude these two states from the final tally and expect to win them back in the general election.

Furthermore, only candidates without scruples would deliberately take their name off the Michigan ballot in order to invalidate the votes for his opponent.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:28:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton's connivance shouldn't be rewarded in Mi. (1.83 / 6)

Only a candidate without any scruples would deliberately leave their name on the Michigan ballot in order "win" an uncontested primary, they themself helped to strip of it's delegates the previous August.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:40:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's connivance shouldn't be rewarded (none / 0)

LOL! Thanks for troll rating me for telling the truth.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Fri May 23, 2008 at 02:31:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

With your propaganda skills (1.60 / 5)

and the passion you show defending a ONE CANDIDATE ELECTION, you could get a PR job working for the Generals in Burma.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:46:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With your propaganda skills (2.00 / 1)

Um, Kucinich and Gravel were still on the ballot.  Kucinich has no scruples then, correct?


by alamedadem on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:51:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With your propaganda skills (1.50 / 4)

OK then. A ONE MAJOR CANDIDATE ELECTION, kind of like the one in Russia.

Oooh! 2,363 votes for Gravel.

Some dictators like to run against token candidates with little name reconition too. That doesn't make those elections democratic.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:13:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With your propaganda skills (1.50 / 2)

Obama knew that Hillary would win in Michigan so he chose to take his name off the ballot both to delegitimize the outcome of the election and to curry favor with Iowa caucus goers, and Edwards and Biden followed suit for the same reasons. It's known as politics. It was a gambit and it probably paid off in Iowa. He also compounded the insult to Michiganders by using his legal staff to stonewall attempts to allow a revote.

There were four names still on the ballot: Dodd (who admittedly dropped out before the election), Gravel, Kucinich, and Clinton. But if you want to blame anyone for this mess, blame Obama, because he has been playing a particularly anti-democratic game of hardball politics throughout this primary season without any concern for how his tactics diminish the Democrats' chances of regaining the presidency in the GE.


Fortune strums a mournful tune for those whose campaigns peak too soon. --Bored of the Rings
by Inky on Fri May 23, 2008 at 10:56:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With your propaganda skills (1.50 / 2)

OK then. A ONE MAJOR CANDIDATE ELECTION, kind of like the one in Russia.

Oooh! 2,363 votes for Gravel.

Some dictators like to run against token candidates with little name reconition too. That doesn't make those elections democratic.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:14:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With your propaganda skills (2.00 / 2)

Kucinich tried to take his name off, but missed the deadline.


by DeskHack on Fri May 23, 2008 at 01:41:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With your propaganda skills (2.00 / 2)

Uh, Kucinich didn't get his name off in time.  That's why he was on the ballot - a clerical error.


by rfahey22 on Fri May 23, 2008 at 01:49:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: OBAMA STYLE DEMOCRACY (2.00 / 1)

A point of clarification then - the argument you're making, that only "candidates without scruples" took their name off the Michigan ballot back in October with the intention of invalidating a perceived Clinton victory, and that these unscrupulous candidates include not only Barack Obama, but Dennis Kucinich, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, and John Edwards as well.  I don't know how you can make this argument about Edwards - if anything, Michigan is one of the three or four states in the entire country where he'd be expected to perform the best, and with Edwards on the ballot, I'm not sure a Clinton victory is even 50% likely.  Richardson and Biden, I think it's fair to say, were viewed back in October as tacitly supporting Clinton should their nominations fail, so ascribing their actions to a desire to invalidate Clinton's win, even in light of Richardson's eventual "defection," seems unlikely.  Do you really believe that Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd were the only two candidates in this election with any scruples?

Link to Source


When I grow up, I want to be a superdelegate!
by robitude on Fri May 23, 2008 at 08:28:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (none / 0)


Not this time.
by jedley on Fri May 23, 2008 at 02:18:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 20)

Democrats include EVERY VOTE - according to the wishes of the voter.

So you agree that Obama should receive a popular vote number in Michigan that aligns with his support  there (as indicated by exit polls)?  Those voters' clear wishes were to vote for Obama.

So you also agree that the caucus state estimates should be counted into the total?

Since your statement above indicates that you agree to both of these stipulations, I look forward to your no longer making the argument that Sen. Clinton is leading in the popular vote.  If Obama receives votes in MI, and caucus states are counted, he's ahead, and is likely to stay ahead through the end of the primaries/caucuses.


Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.
by mistersite on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:11:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 7)

(golf clap)

You'll grow grey awaiting a response.


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:39:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

**cricketts** (2.00 / 4)


by notme54 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:48:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

COUNT ALL THE VOTES!!!!!! (For Hillary.) (2.00 / 2)

Agreeing with the others.


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 4)

I'm curious as to why that last clause was added.  It was almost as if the person realized that literally including every vote likely would mean that at least some of the uncommitted vote would have to be allocated to Obama, so she needed an escape clause.


by rfahey22 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:12:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Outstanding! (2.00 / 4)


::clap::

::clap::

::clap::


Mooseburgers? Careful Sarah. Moose bite back!
by spacemanspiff on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:12:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 5)

You should reply to your own thread here, six times in a row- then you can get six times the mojo!  

Who says we aren't learners?


John McCain wants to stay in Iraq.
by ihaveseenenough on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:29:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

VEEP Stakes: Hillary vs Edwards (1.87 / 8)

as of 10:30 PM EDT

► Edwards  71%

► Clinton  29%

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/22/1882 0/4706

Hillary loses the VeepStakes, even on this site.


"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!
by Al Rodgers on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:26:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Losing a MyDD popularity contest? (none / 0)

I'm sure she'll get over it.


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:31:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

is there anyone left? (2.00 / 1)


"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!
by Al Rodgers on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:32:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Zing! (2.00 / 1)


Mooseburgers? Careful Sarah. Moose bite back!
by spacemanspiff on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:38:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VEEP Stakes: Hillary vs Edwards (none / 0)

Good.  I doubt want her on that ticket.  

It's beneath her.


by bellarose on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:27:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VEEP Stakes: Hillary vs Edwards (none / 0)

Unless, of course, she's on the top.


by bellarose on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:28:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Phew - that's sexy! (none / 0)


"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!
by Al Rodgers on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:45:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

SEXIST! (none / 0)

How dare you insinuate that women have sex!


Stop the racism. Fight the smears.
by CrazyDrumGuy on Fri May 23, 2008 at 03:43:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VEEP Stakes: Hillary vs Edwards (none / 0)

What do you mean "even" here.   Hillary is MUCH more popular with voters than with bloggers.


by mdFriendofHillary on Fri May 23, 2008 at 06:31:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VEEP Stakes: Hillary vs Edwards (none / 0)

What do you mean "even" here.   Hillary is MUCH more popular with voters than with bloggers.


by mdFriendofHillary on Fri May 23, 2008 at 06:32:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Have you forgotten... (2.00 / 11)

That it was a near majority of Clinton supporters who voted to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates last year? That it was Hillary Clinton herself who stated that Michigan wouldn't count for anything? That it was Hillary Clinton herself who signed the pledge stating that Michigan and Florida wouldn't count for anything?

Seriously, I've defended you and others here against the more vile and reprehensible attacks upon your persons. But why do you continue to push this kind of disingenuous and intellectually dishonest argument that has no ending other than civil war should you get your way?

Why?


by Yalin on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:35:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Have you forgotten... (2.00 / 4)

Sorry, Yalin, you'll be old and gray before you get an answer this. The best response, it seems, when you have no answer, is to ignore the question.


by vermontprog on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:42:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, she hasn't forgotten.... (1.83 / 6)

but she DOES willfully block those inconvenient facts out of her mind since they dont fit in with her worldivew of a Hillary Clinton that is above reproach and can and never has done any wrong.

She bascially employs the Rovian tactic of repeating a lie over and over again until people just assume its true.


by Deano963 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:42:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Have you forgotten... (2.00 / 3)

Because they think they can drill it into our heads if they just yell loud enough and repeat it long enough.


by rfahey22 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:43:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I get it... you think we're stupid. (2.00 / 7)

Why else would you expect us to buy the contorted case that what took place in Florida (and Michigan) were perfectly acceptable as fair elections and should be counted, even though everyone was told (and Hillary agreed) they would not count.

Sorry, telling people that the rules of the contest are one thing, and then changing them once they don't suit you, is not Democracy.  It's hypocrisy.


by Pragmatic Left on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:56:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This offer not good in Michigan (2.00 / 2)

Where the "will of the voter" - as interpreted by the Clinton campaign - was that not one single person supported Barack Obama.


by TL on Fri May 23, 2008 at 07:22:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (none / 0)

Yes every vote should count in elections that are free and fair.

Thee elections were neither, so some compromise is necessary in order to get a result that is fair to both parties.

It looks as though the Clinton's only see 100% of the vote in Michigan going to them as fair.


by telfishbackagain on Fri May 23, 2008 at 09:37:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.00 / 1)

so shy did your candidate block re-votes/


by anya109 on Fri May 23, 2008 at 10:23:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.00 / 1)

Why did your candidate block re-votes?


by anya109 on Fri May 23, 2008 at 10:24:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He, like Hillary (none / 0)

was looking for tactical advantage.  Thing is, she blocked a caucus solution, which was pretty much the only won that would overcome the issues of letting those who had crossed over in the original invalidated primary to participate.  Hillary flatly said she would "not accept a caucus".  So while Obama could have done more to promote a revote, Hillary wasn't exactly accommodating either.

Her slogan said it all:  "She's in it to win it."  Which implies any argument, any tactic is worthy as long as it helps her win.  That's why she doesn't mind the contradictions between her "count every vote" rhetoric and her quotes from last October about everyone knowing MI wouldn't count.

Problem is, we are Democrats.  We have principles.  We can understand why the DNC imposed harsh penalties on calendar-jumping states, so that the process doesn't get even more protracted and out of hand next time.

We probably don't always nominate the best general election candidates, in terms of likelyhood of winning the general.  But we have a soft spot for those with a little integrity.  Hillary Clinton has some atoning to do if she wants another shot at it in four or eight years.


by corph on Fri May 23, 2008 at 11:17:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He, like Hillary (none / 0)

Yep, the problem is we're Democrats, and we believe in COUNTING EVERY VOTE. At least some democrats do.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Fri May 23, 2008 at 02:36:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary doesn't. (none / 0)

I refer you to her quote from last October.

Presidential primaries are not American Idol.  There is no "franchise" or absolute right to vote in a primary.  Counting votes cast in invalidated elections only contaminates the whole process.  Obama is leading the popular vote held in states with genuine elections as defined by international standards.  Obama is leading in elected and super delegates.  Under current rules, he is 56 delegates from the nomination.

I'm sick of this stupid dishonest argument, and I don't even believe you're a Democrat.  You will find more kindred souls back at FreeRepublic.


by corph on Fri May 23, 2008 at 03:05:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (1.81 / 11)

Oh yea - see sig line - give money to our gal!


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:05:58 PM EST

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 8)

She needs it folks!

Mark Penn hasn't had a Krispy Kreme in days!!

Help Hillary pay off her debt to Our Jabba!!


by BlueinColorado on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:19:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 1)

Do you laugh hysterically at everything you write?


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:32:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 4)

No, I chuckle, soft and sardonic, with a villainous grin.

But I'm glad to hear you like my stuff.

(Pssst, Alegre: Ratings abuse! Why I'm simply shocked. Good thing you're one of The Armstrong Untouchables).


by BlueinColorado on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:52:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ratings abuse? (none / 0)

Someone has thin skin.  Would you like a hug?


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:37:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ratings abuse? (2.00 / 1)

Thin skin? Moi? I am  merely defending the integrity of the ratings system against Alegre's abuses. I'm kinda like a member of the Justice League.

A hug? meh... got any beer?


by BlueinColorado on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:12:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

How about a shot? (none / 0)

I have a bottle of North Korean liquor sitting on the shelf.


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:36:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (none / 0)

not quite as loudly as we laugh at everything you write.


Congratulations Steny Hoyer! Our 2008 Chickenshit Leader Of The Year!
by RockvilleLiberal2 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:59:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (none / 0)

You remember me?  I didn't realize I was making such an impact.


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:31:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 2)

Speaking of Mark Penn.
Last month Hillary's campaign paid Mark Penn's company almost $3 million, 1 out of every 6 dollars the faithful Hillary donors sent to support their candidate.
Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie
by toyomama on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:04:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (none / 0)

Personally, I don't think he's done a very good job for her. But maybe Clinton folks are happy with his performance and would love to keep funding him.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:06:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (none / 0)

yeesh, you'd almost think she plans to hire him again at some point in the future.


by BlueinColorado on Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:14:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 1)

It's good to see that kid's bike and videogame money was so well spent.


by matchles on Fri May 23, 2008 at 04:06:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Why should anyone take you seriously (2.00 / 6)

Can you take a look at the first comment on this diary and then explain why anyone should take you seriously ever again?



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:35:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why should anyone take you seriously (2.00 / 1)

Judging by the TR with no response, I'll take that to mean, "we shouldn't".



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:00:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why should anyone take you seriously (2.00 / 1)

The calling card of a coward.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:58:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (none / 0)

Yes, pony up! Especially if you're from Indiana. If you don't pay now, you will later.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign has moved on from Indiana, leaving behind $55,000 in unpaid bills for campaign events at Indiana University.

The debts are for appearances made by Clinton, former President Bill Clinton and their daughter, Chelsea, during March and April leading up to Indiana's May 6 primary.
Advertisement

Barack Obama's campaign, meanwhile, has already paid the $108,142 it owed IU for two Assembly Hall events -- a rally featuring the Illinois senator and an Obama-sponsored concert by Dave Matthews and Tim Reynolds.


Stop the racism. Fight the smears.
by CrazyDrumGuy on Fri May 23, 2008 at 03:39:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree. (2.00 / 7)

It's time Democrats started acting like Democrats again.

This is why we shouldn't try to count contests we agreed wouldn't count after the fact, simply because we need the results as justification to stay in the larger contest while paying off our debts from our mismanaged campaigns.


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:07:21 PM EST

Re: I agree. (2.00 / 2)

I am surprised democrats would be arguing for the disenfranchisement of voters based on " rules "

2.5 million folks voted and democrats are supposed to ignore that.

That would be the day the democratic party loses what it stands for.

Talk less of the fact that it is not an Americaan values.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:10:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree. (2.00 / 3)

Yes, what are these "rules" people incessantly speak of?  Who made them up?  Why should we be expected to follow them?

Sounds like these "rules" might be just another subversive Obama plot!


UNITY!
by The Great Gatsby on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:12:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well... (2.00 / 5)

those "rules" are the itsy bitsy things that hold our government and nation together.

I know certain people view things like the Constitution as "quaint"...but we're better than that.

Aren't we?


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:13:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well... (2.00 / 10)

There is a certain former president who lost his law license because he didn't think it was necessary to tell the truth under oath.  He thought he didn't need to follow the same rules that govern everyone else.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:16:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well... (2.00 / 4)

Alegre, You may troll rate me for this, but you know it's all true. And I didn't think he should have been impeached because he only lied about personal matters, not matters of state.

But it is true that Bill didn't need to make himself a lame duck so early because he couldn't come clean about his relationship with "that woman."  And it is true that he lost his law license for lying under oath in a sexual harassment suit.  

And I bet you support women's rights to bring those suits, right? Do you support defendants lying during discovery - I think not.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:33:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Heres some mojo to make up for it... (2.00 / 1)

While I can understand if some people think bringing up the Clinton impeachment was uncalled for, you were not ripping on a fellow MyDD user and were attempting to tie it to the 'rules' argument, so I hardly find it troll-rate worthy.


by protothad on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:30:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well... (none / 0)

Only if you think the rules of DNC represent the Constitution of the US .

One should be a little more apt .

I don't know what is a more fundamental value than counting the votes of millions of Americans who participate in representative democracy.

I don't think the DNC are that inept.

Your comment is absurd.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:21:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So... (2.00 / 2)

...basically, you agree that we should ignore the rules when they benefit our preferred candidates?


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:22:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So... (none / 0)

I agree that the votes of millions of Americans should be counted regardless of who it may benefit or not because it is the only right thing to do.

The democratic party should not even be thinking of not counting votes of American citizens under any circumstance.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:26:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Do you then believe (none / 0)

children should have been allowed to vote in the FL and MI primaries?


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:27:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So... (2.00 / 5)

Okay, so here's a solution: seat the pledged delegates at 1/2 vote.  Give all of MI's uncommitted delegates and votes to Obama (after all, everyone else who took their name off has endorsed him).  Don't seat any elected official or Dem Party superdelegates from those two states; they were the ones who made the decision, they should be the ones who suffer.

It's the perfect solution: The people have their say, their state still pays a penalty for jumping in line, and the people who made the decision get punished, setting a precedent very few governors or state legislatures will want to go against.


Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.
by mistersite on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:31:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So... (none / 0)

but what about the voters who didn't vote because the media in both of their states said their vote would not count...is their vote not as important??


I can see Lake Erie from where I live, so can I please run the Navy?
by hootie4170 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:50:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So... (2.00 / 1)

What was Clinton's position on MI and FL before their elections?

Why did she change her position afterwards?

If you can answer that honestly while showing clinton is being principled and consistent, then you'll have an argument.  Until then, all this crap about MI and FL is just after the fact whining by a sore loser who wants to change the rules in the middle of the game.


John McCain vows to overturn Roe
by soccerandpolitics on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:30:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The current penalty is too harsh... (none / 0)

... but seating the delegations at full strength would also be unfair.  FL and MI jumped the schedule.  There is a proscribed penalty (seating them at half strength) that was documented and known by everyone in advance.  If not that, some other compromise should be worked out, but letting the line jumpers get off without penalty would invite chaos in the future.


by protothad on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:40:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree. (2.00 / 3)

Look, when a result is invalid, it's invalid.  If you run a scientific experiment and your sample is accidentally contaminated, you have to throw the result out, even if you really like that result.  No one's blaming the voters, but the conditions in MI and FL simply aren't a realistic barometer of how the vote would have turned out under normal circumstances.  Anyway, this will be resolved soon enough.


by rfahey22 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:14:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree. (none / 0)

Check out the new Quinnipiac poll for Florida:

Obama 41%
Clinton 41%

The Janaury election was fatally flawed.  It would be undemocratic to give it any effect.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?Rele aseID=1180


John McCain vows to overturn Roe
by soccerandpolitics on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:40:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree. (2.00 / 5)

"2.5 million folks voted and democrats are supposed to ignore that."

And millions more may have voted if they had been aware that there vote would actually count for something.

But, whatever, who cares about them, right?


by pomology on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:16:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They don't matter if it don't help our gal! (2.00 / 1)

All for Hillary and none for Obama..that is how it should be...don't you understand democracy?  Our people count and yours don't


by netgui68 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:10:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree. (2.00 / 4)

I guess I'll have to say it again for everyone who doesn't listen.  Counting Florida and Michigan as valid elections is the equivalent of the Yankees and Red Sox playing an exhibition game in March and the winner of that game turning around and saying "Hey, um...we actually are going to count it as a real game.  Sorry."


by ProgressiveDL on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:18:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree. (2.00 / 4)

How many people didn't vote because they were told, including by Hillary Clinton, that the decision of the DNC should be respected?

Split the delegations in half, it's time to end this nonsense.


by BlueinColorado on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:21:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where you surprised when Hillary did it? (2.00 / 5)

Where you surprised when Hillary argued against to disenfranchise the Michigan vote?


"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!
by Al Rodgers on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:22:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree. (none / 0)

How about the ability for lesser-known, underfinanced candidates to make a breakthrough?  You can't do that in large states, where television and name recognition dominate.  That's why the candidates signed the pledge saying that IA, NH, NV, and SC should go first.  Otherwise, Chris Dodd, Mike Huckabee, and Joe Biden or a future candidate like them would have no shot to prove themselves.

Democracy isn't just about counting votes; it's also about giving all the candidates a fair shot, too.

And disenfranchisement?  Well, because FL has a closed primary, were independents (and Republicans) disenfranchised, too?


by Brad G on Fri May 23, 2008 at 10:33:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's DEMOCRACY Stupid! (2.00 / 5)

I don't know how anyone would want to be on the side of not recognizing the votes of American citizen.

The Clinton camp clearly has the winning argument.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:08:23 PM EST