Honest question for supporters of Hillary Clinton about the FL/MI debacle.

[Danger Mouse]

Okay, here's the deal. Both Hillary and Barack were aware before these primaries that they wouldn't count, and the delegates would not be seated at the convention. At the time, there was no protest from either one.
Hillary is now saying she wants the delegates seated as they are.
To me, this strikes me as flip-flopping...she agreed to the DNC rules before she was against them.
Here's my honest question: would she be making such a big deal about this if it was OBAMA who had won those contests?

[annie1]

1. i think there should be a re-vote for MI, probably for FLA as well.

and of course she wants them sat as is cuz she won them. who wouldn't? obama would want the same.

[Danger Mouse]

2. i'm just saying that it's a little dishonest...

to say you agree to the rules then change your mind when it's to your advantage.

[Danger Mouse]

3. and...crickets...

so...nobody's willing to answer a difficult question?

[Dinger]

10. Many Have Left GDP

I like to "live on the edge," so I try to chime in when I can.

[doyourealize1]

4. Not flip-flopping

You're delusional if you think that Obama wouldn't protest if he had won. Voter disenfranchisement is wrong in all circumstances.

It's a tactical move. Just because at the time Obama didn't complain either doesn't mean he wouldn't act the same way.

[Balbus]

5. No, if Obama had won those contests, she'd not be making a big deal out of it.

Obama would...

[spag68]

6. Fla.-Mi.

I don't care what HRC or Obama think about it. All the voters in those states should be given some kind of chance to seat delegates. Try to remember that Fla. being lost cost us Pres. Gore.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. Of course not, but Obama would be doing it for her. Their job is to win.

On a related note, as a non-Obama supporter, my solution to MI and FL is the same as my solution to all elections...

Employ the method that maximizes legal participation.

I cannot imagine answering any differently for any election, anywhere.

[Rageneau]

8. Hillary didn't "agree" to any rules. She was not given a choice to.

It is wrong to believe that Hillary agreed with the DNC that Florida and Michigan shouldn't count. On the contrary, those are two of Hillary's strongest states, so she very much wanted them in the mix.

But she had no choice, and neither did the voters of Florida or Michigan. In Florida, the rules were set by the GOP legislature on PURPOSE to cause Democrats a problem, and boy, did they succeed!
Michigan was different; the state party was more at fault than in Florida, which is why most candidates withdrew their names.

But the Florida Primary was a fair and square election. All the candidates were on the ballot and Hillary won going away.

All Hillary is asking for now is what she has been asking for all along -- to count that fair and square Florida election, which should have counted all along. Her position on that has not changed a bit.

[Danger Mouse]

9. I don't recall her criticizing the DNC decision...

before the primary took place.
That's what makes her look hypocritical.
I'm sure Obama would've done the same, but that doesn't make it RIGHT.

[lewis_in_fw]

17. January 25th (4 days before Florida primary) Seat the delegates!

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5492
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/09/the_jockeying_behind_the_four.php

Probably other instances if you search.

Obama himself wanted to seat the delegates back in Sept '07. Is that not hypocritical?

[HooptieWagon]

12. wrong, GOP did NOT force early election on FL Dems

Fl Dem Party embraced it along with Reps. A Dem introduced the bill. Vote was 115-1. Had the Dems put up resistance, DNC would have made arrangement to seat FL delegates - its in the rules. The reason delegates were stripped is b/c Fl Dems were complicit in the clusterfuck.

[Yossariant]

11. False premise. Garbage in; garbage out. Clinton did protest AT THE TIME.

Idiot Dean decided to surrender Florida to the GOP, but Clinton thought she could win there:

"01 Sep 2007

That's one reason why Clinton's campaign probably hesitated before signing the pledge.

The other is that Clinton's strategists disagree with the DNC about Florida's viability in the general election. Clinton's team believes she can win there; the DNC is more skeptical that Democrats can recover. Clinton doesn't want to give Republicans a heads-up there."


http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/09/the_jockeying_behind_the_four.php

[madeline_con]

13. No.

[lewis_in_fw]

14. Both candidates have wanted to seat Florida delegates since before the primary occured

Obama:

http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/Magister/blog/&blogId=1118

Clinton:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5492
(Probably some even earlier then that)

[Fresh_Start]

15. I'm not surpporting either. But here's my take....

the election is for the voters.
Its not about what the candidates want.
Its about what the voters want.
The voters showed up on the assigned day and did their duty as citizens: they voted.

The voters didn't pick a date.
The voters didn't agree to the DNC compromise.
The voters just did what voters are required to do: they voted - record breaking numbers for a primary election.

The democratic party screwed up.
The voters did not screw up

[lewis_in_fw]

16. That does not matter. "Rules are Rules" as the Obamaniacs so eloquently put it. *NT*

[Fresh_Start]

18. I'm really angry about disenfranchising legitimate voters

neither campaign is innocent

The Democratic national and state parties are a substantial contributors to the problem.
Not just FL and MI, but other states as well.
Screw up staffing.
Screw up ballots
Fail to allow sufficient time
Fail to control crowds

[lewis_in_fw]

20. I hear you. But remember, RULES should ALWAYS take precedent! No Rules=Anarchy *NT*

[Fresh_Start]

21. there were rules

The state set up a primary date and ran the primary election
which was approved by their legislature.
Florida election law applied (such as it is)

[lewis_in_fw]

22. Not the right Rules! E.g. Rule A outrules Rule B outrules Rule C. Get it yet? *NT*

[nonconformist]

19. Obama would be making the big deal if he won those states.

And I have to say, I think even if the states were tied, Hillary would be fighting for them to be seated. There are a lot of people in those states that are pissed off, and it's also politically smart to listen to those voters in key swing states.