I have a solution for FL and MI that should satisfy both parties

[dansolo]

Is the Credentials Committee only bound to accept or reject seating the delegates, or do they have the power to implement a compromise solution?

I don't like either of the two currently presented options--seating the delegates as is, or having a revote. I am really bothered by a revote, but it is not because I am an Obama supporter, and not because I want to disenfranchise anyone. What bothers me about a revote is that it will basically reward the states for breaking the rules, giving them even more influence than they were originally trying for. How about this as an option:

No revote. Use the existing primary results, and award Obama the Uncommitted delegates in Michigan, BUT penalize each state by cutting their delegations in half, and also by stripping the votes of the superdelegates from the two states.

[TAWS]

1. The Credentials Committe meets at the convention, they are not going to do anything drastic n/t

[Fresh_Start]

2. just strip the superdelegates.....

the voters did nothing wrong and shouldn't be penalized.
Penalize the superdelegates. They caused the problem.
And also strip the DNC superdelegates because they also caused the problem

[dansolo]

6. The DNC is just trying to enforce the rules previously agreed upon by the states

I just think that there should be some sort of penalty incurred by flagrantly violating the rules, or else there will be chaos as different states start jockeying for primacy. I just think that this solution would allow us to avoid the cost and insanity of a revote, while still maintaining the will of the people. The elections weren't fair, but they did happen. There are no good solutions, but I an very concerned about setting a precedent here.

[Fresh_Start]

7. by the state party officials

not by the state and not by the voters

[Cronus Protagonist]

3. Florida voters should not be penalized in any way

Republicans "broke" the Democratic rules. The Democratic voters had nothing to do with the timing of their elections.

[lapfog_1]

4. The credentials committee can decide to seat or not seat the

delegates... Obama will control the credentials committee.

And I don't like you solution very much either.

Either redo the vote (and I don't care that this somehow rewards them for breaking the rules) or don't seat anyone.

Hillary will not accept any redo (she is on record as stating that she won't accept a redo caucus, I suspect she won't accept a redo primary either).

So screw her and the FL and MI officials that took their voters down this path... maybe the voters will do something about it, like replace their local officials.

[dansolo]

9. Could you elaborate on what you don't like about it?

I recognize that it probably favors Hillary, though eliminating the superdelegates would probably hurt her more. I just can't see any solution that won't be complained about on both sides. At least this approach will lessen the impact of the unfair primaries, without giving the impression that the voters are just being cast aside.

[lapfog_1]

13. Why reward Hillary for leaving her name on the Michigan ballot

and reward her for entering the primary season with the best known "name" and presumptive nominee (which is why she won Florida).

Even though you take away half the reward for that type of sleazy politics, why reward at all?

And I don't really like the entire concept of a redo or seating any portion. Mostly because what does this mean to the other candidates (not Hillary and not Obama).

Let's take the case of John Edwards.

Let's suppose that Florida was on Super Tuesday along with everyone else. This would have been OK with the DNC and the candidates... and known well in advance. Let's further suppose that instead of throwing all of his eggs into the Iowa basket, Edwards had decided to make a stand in Florida. Now let's say he still came in second in Iowa, third in New Hampshire, etc.... but he campaigned heavily in Florida. Being a "southern white male" with a populist message, let's say he wins or comes in a close second in Florida... Now maybe the MSM finally pays some attention to him, or at the very least, he has quite a few more delegates in his hip pocket (his campaign is only suspended!) come convention time. He really does get to play king maker OR the party turns to him as the convention stalemates with Obama and Clinton.

But Florida screwed him out of that opportunity. He played by the DNC rules and didn't campaign in Florida... how would HE feel about a Florida "do over"? Is it fair to him or any of the other candidates?

The only fair thing is the honor the DNC rules and their stated punishment for breaking the rules. Don't seat the delegates.

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Stop bitchin'. Start callin'.

Why take any of OUR words for it? We're all just a bunch of schmoes here.

Get it from the donkey's mouth!

DNCC Contacts:
Jenni Engebretsen
Natalie Wyeth
[phone]

DNC Contacts:
Karen Finney
Stacie Paxton
[phone]

http://www.demconvention.com/dnc-elects-standing-committee-leadership-for-2008-democratic-national-convention-2/">(Source)

Because being a Democrat is about bein' all Democratic an' stuff.

:evilgrin:

--p!

[Yossariant]

8. Counting the votes as half IS the actual penalty according to the RULES -- just like the GOP.

Because Dean knew that Clinton would do well in Florida, he says that they wanted to "make an example" by punishing them above and beyond the RULES.

As usual, the RNC makes the DNC look like a bunch of idiots.

And here comes President McCain.

Maybe the GOP bought off Dean.

Check his bank account.

[dansolo]

10. You are right, Dean screwed up

But I wouldn't attribute it to any scheming on his part.

[Yossariant]

11. "Coincidentally" then, Florida played an important role in Clinton's original campaign plan.

The DNC should have backed down long ago and now it's way too late.

[tabatha]

12. I have read about a vote by mail primary

that sounds good because it is cheaper, and should save voters a second trip to the booth.