Dems Fight Over Fla., Mich. Delegates

Clinton Wants Results Of Primaries Honored; Obama Says They Shouldn't Skew Overall Count

(CBS/AP)  Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton desperately wants meaningless wins in Florida and Michigan to turn into votes she can count on. It won't be easy with the Democratic National Committee rules standing in her way.

The DNC is refusing to back down from the tough sanctions it imposed on the two states, which held early contests in violation of party rules. They have been stripped of all their delegates to the national convention in August where either Clinton or rival Sen. Barack Obama will be nominated for president.

The DNC has offered Florida and Michigan a couple ways out in compliance with party rules. First, they could hold second nominating contests, but Democratic leaders in both states reject that idea. Or they can appeal to the DNC's credentials committee, a 186-member body that usually operates in obscurity and has a complicated membership and rules process that will require deft maneuvering in this divided campaign.

Just like the some 800 superdelegates, this committee could hold the cards in helping decide the Democratic nominee if the race stays close.

Obama said Friday that he wants Michigan and Florida - two key states in the general election campaign - to participate in the convention without affecting the outcome of the election. He did not provide specifics about conditions except to say it wouldn't be fair for Clinton to get the majority.

"I want to make sure that the Michigan and Florida delegates have the means to participate," he said at a news conference. "There are probably a whole slew of different solutions that could be come up with that would both achieve the interests of making sure that Michigan and Florida delegates participate without skewing the delegate count."

Clinton's campaign insists the delegates should be seated in accordance with more than 2 million votes cast in the two states last month.

"I think that the people of Michigan and Florida spoke in a very convincing way, that they want their voices and their votes to be heard," Clinton told reporters. "The turnout in both places was record-breaking and I think that that should be respected."

Clinton did not object to the DNC stripping the states of their delegates when the decision was made last year. Some of her backers were on the committee that made the decision to do so and actively supported it.

"Now, when they believe it serves their political interests, they're trying to rewrite the rules," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said in a call with reporters.

As of Thursday, the delegate count stood at 1,276 for Obama and 1,220 for Clinton. If the DNC were to award Michigan and Florida's 313 delegates based on the vote in their primaries, she would be ahead because she won both states.

That would be unfair, Obama said, because the candidates had promised not to compete in those renegade states.

"I think even my 6-year-old would understand it would not be fair for Senator Clinton to be awarded delegates when there was no campaign," he told reporters Friday.

Clinton's operatives want DNC chairman Howard Dean to come up with a resolution, but Dean is staying out of the fight for now. Dean spokesman Karen Finney said Florida and Michigan still have a choice to follow the rules.

"At this point, there are still more than 1,000 pledged delegates to be determined and 33 percent of our party has yet to have the opportunity to have their voices heard, so it would be premature to speculate," Finney said. Dean declined an interview request.

Most of the credentials committee members will be appointed by the Clinton and Obama campaigns, depending on how they perform in nominating contests across the country, with Dean having already named 25. Although Obama has won more contests so far, Clinton has won most of the larger states - and larger states get more seats. So there's the potential for the committee to be closely divided if the race stays tight.

The credential committee would meet in July or August, and its decision would be in the form of a recommendation to all the delegates at the convention. They have a range of options to consider, including recommending reinstatement of all or some of the delegates divided any way they see fit between Obama and Clinton. The recommendation would become the first order of business at the convention on Aug. 25.

One Clinton adviser, speaking on a condition of anonymity, said there are no legal options to pursue in courts, which give parties wide latitude in crafting their rules.

The Clinton adviser suggested a compromise where perhaps the Michigan delegates could be split evenly among the two since Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot there. But the Florida delegates should be bound by the primary results, the adviser argued, because Obama's name was on the ballot in that case. The Illinois senator didn't have the option of removing it like he did in Michigan.

That's a compromise that the Obama campaign would be unlikely to accept without a fight. And Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, who has been leading the fight to get his state's delegates reinstated and is backing Clinton, said he doesn't think it will matter. He suggested he would just like to see the delegates seated, even if they aren't favoring Clinton.

He said he is encouraging the DNC to at least declare that the Florida delegates will be seated regardless of who they are awarded to so at least they can make their travel plans to go to Denver.

"The likelihood is one way or another we're going to know the nominee by late June at the latest, in which case it will be then moot about who the delegation is pledged to and all of that," Nelson said.

Michigan and Florida had moved up their dates to gain prominence in the presidential selection process, but ironically they would be more relevant if they had stayed put. Florida was originally scheduled to vote March 4 and Michigan on March 9, and both would no doubt have been pivotal in the hotly contested race between Clinton and Obama.

[repdemapart]

If DNC will not seat delegates from MI and FL in the convention, the (FL & MI) voters will be discouraged not to mention disheartened. YOU KNOW WHAT%u2019S GOING TO HAPPEN - They will not bother to vote in November anymore (MARK THIS DAY). Personally, that%u2019s a bigger problem. The number of FL and MI Democratic voters who participated in the primaries outnumbered that of the Republicans. In a larger scale, it is a preview to which party these 2 states will award their ELECTORAL VOTES to. If you upset these voters by not seating its delegates %u2013 we know what%u2019s going to happen.



AND BESIDES %u2013 WHY PUNISH THE STATE VOTERS WHEN IT%u2019S THE STATE PARTY HEADS THAT INSISTED ON MOVING THEIR PRIMARY DATES.

What say you???

[jimmyc1955]

Lets try this from another angle.

If CNN or CBS has a poll and you voted on that poll but CBS or CNN decided to make everybody from NY or Cal inelligable for some reason - are you being robbed of a vote?

How is this different that Dem party primary votes? This is an internal matter to the Democratic party - this isn''t a government issue. Nobody is being "robbed" of a vote or their voice. That choice comes on the second Tuesday in November.

Demanding that Florida and Michigan be counted is up to the party - it''s that simple. If the Nancy Pelosi - the titular head of the party says no - thats it. The courts SHOULDN''T interfere. But if we have learned nothing in the last 20 years its that the courts can and will interfere with anybody and anything.

So - will Hillary rip the party apart by suing to get Florida and Michigan counted?

[taddles-2009]

"This is not complicated, but people within and outside the party are trying to control who wins.

Posted by maris01 at 04:00 AM : Feb 18, 2008"

Except for the fact that the state Dem party decided to change their date thus disqualified their votes your argument might hold up. All the candidates along with the DNC decided that Florida and Michigan votes don''t count because those states Dem parties broke the rules. Regardless of how the voters feel, the people who are in charge of their party in those states $crewed them. Their votes don''t and shouldn''t count...sorry but maybe next time the Dem leaders in Florida and Michigan won''t act with such arrogant impunity.

[taddles-2009]

"We deserve to hear the truth!

Posted by TruthBeTold- at 08:58 PM : Feb 17, 2008"

The truth is that this toothless freak is reading a script off of cue cards. This isn''t even swift-boating, it''s$hit-boating. If you''re going to try a smear campaign at least get some decent actors, rounding up losers off the street to read from cue cards isn''t even good enough to be pathetic.

[taddles-2009]

"Delegates must be included. It''''s about people''''s voices, not smug B. Hussein. It is not the people''''s fault that their governments changed the dates so that they couldnt vote!

Posted by RFCRTL at 06:33 PM : Feb 17, 2008"

"Government" didn''t change anything, the state Democratic parties changed the dates because they felt that the early states esentialy decided the elections before they could get a chance to vote. They were informed months ago that if they chose to move their primary dates that the votes would not be recognized and their delegates would not be seated at the convention. They chose to disregard the DNC thus causing the problems themselves. No one but the state Dem party had anything to do with it so don''t go blaming Obama. The fact that now after those votes came in Hillary wants them to count, when she was among the people originally deciding that they wouldn''t, is reprehensible.

[taddles-2009]

"The child like behaviour of these candidates proves they are not qualified let alone experianced.

Posted by jack3213 at 10:06 AM : Feb 18, 2008"


What did you do, post this same comment in every forum on the CBS website??? This is the third forums with this same post. How about posting something relevant without spamming the entire forums.

[DCropp]

Hillary''s campaign leaders agreed to the rules. Once again, they try to change the rules when they realize Hillary can''t win without changing the rules.

How many times is Hillary going to flip-flop before America says enough. (See NAFTA, China Trade Agreements, Iraq war, being a lead promoter on a Nuclear Energy plan that she now says was bad, Michigan, Florida, Texas Democratic rules, caucuses, poor election campaign that showed she IS INCAPABLE OF BEING READY DAY 1, lowering health care costs while taking lobbyist money from drug companies, etc).
The list goes on and on.

[jack3213]

Alot of the strife and chaos stems from the media''s involvement and their lack of telling facts over fiction, and their insane ability to exaggerate and spin politics. People can be gullable and easily influenced, which in itself is a shame, but reality is that so many people believe what they read and hear. The first amendment gives us the right to free speech, and this won''t change, however, there is the fact of ethical & moral values and respect. In conclusion, make your own judgement, dont assume to think the media has the answers. Read history and go with your gut. If it is too good to be true it usually is. The Democrats are promising not only things they cannot deliver but alot of what they want is detromental and disaterious to the USA. The child like behaviour of these candidates proves they are not qualified let alone experianced.

[jedi08]

Maris01 and Roudytexan, are you guys going to vote for Obama in the General. I know you love to talk trash but you do realize that it is already over!

Ding dong the witch is dead,

All you Hillary supporters who are praying that somehow the rules will be changed Ive got some bad news for you. THEY WON''T. THERE IS NO WAY THAT IF HILLARY IS DOWN BY SAY 50 or 100 pledged delegates that they will allow Flordia and Michigans vote to count. It just wont happen. Nancy Pelosi has already stated that she would not allow it. Plus she is for Obama (Although she has not stated it pubically) and would never allow Hillary to steal the election by cheating. Anyone with half a brian knows this.

First of all, in Michigan, voters had the option to vote for Hillary or "Uncommitted" and no one campaigned there. Obama and Edwards voluntarily removed their names from the ballots, but it was not required per the DNC. Secondly, in Florida, 1.7 million voters turned out for Obama, Edwards, and Hillary. And, although no one campaigned there, Obama was regularly running ads on cable, but still lost to Hillary by 300,000+ votes (Hillary had almost a million voters, while Obama had ~630,000 voters). The message is pretty clear, voters want their votes honored and their choice was Hillary. This is not complicated, but people within and outside the party are trying to control who wins.

[girlinvt-2009]

I can not believe anyone would call any vote meaningless.Yes every person in both states knew it was not going to count but they refused to allow anyone to take thier rights away and they both had record turn outs.The Republicans had the sense to cut both states delagates in half did the DNC have the same sense no.Floridas votes sould be counted the delagates cut in half. As to Michigan how about we say(even tho 4 out of 6 candidates were on the ballot and Obamas inexperiance took his off)we do a revote.The playing field was level in Fla voters all had the same edge.An sorry people the people of Fla do have tvs,newspapers and the internet so like most of us concerned voters they have been checking out all debates and cspan rallys.

[jimmyc1955]

Wait - I hear a voice from 1998, oral isn''t ***? Its just *** and that isn''t agains the law? Oh wait - yea that was the current candidates husband wasn''t it? He gave us the whole "definition of is" legal argument.

Sorry - this is like other pieces associated with Clinton opponents - much ado about nothing.

[jimmyc1955]

Here is the link - Even the Clinton team admitted the ad was national. The Cable networks don''t exclude one state from the other 49.


%u201CBoth national cable networks told us it would be impossible for us to run advertising nationally that excluded only Florida,%u201D Burton said.

%u201CFor that reason we consulted with the South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Carol Fowler who told us unequivocally she did not consider this to be in violation of [the] pledge made to the early states.%u201D

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/obama_airs_nati.html

this is Clintonesque. Obama clears the ad with the Dem party, and then Clinton claims its a voilate when in fact they themselves knew it wasn''t.

Is this really the type of person you want to represent us?

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by alanrobisch2 at 07:11 PM : Feb 17, 2008

I bet to differ. There are a lot of people who care! As you can very well note, about half of the democratic voters certainly care! And they want someone competent in the White House...not some cultist buffoon!

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by jimmyc1955 at 07:40 PM : Feb 17, 2008

Go read again! They were schedule to run in Georgia, Alabama, and Florida by Comcast!

He knew they would be running in Florida!!!

[jimmyc1955]

klyphan1 - thank you. that is the first post on here from somebody who understands the whole picture.

To put it into a nutshell - our duty is to elect whom we feel is the most qualified, capable LEADER of the free world. Not the best woman, or black man or asian or the one with the most strings to pull - but who will LEAD. I don''t think the Clinton''s have demonstrated an understanding of that word. They don''t lead - they manipulate.

I echo your sentiments - God Bless America.

[alanrobisch]

Posted by jimmyc1955 at 07:48 PM : Feb 17, 2008
excellent post

[jimmyc1955]

libra127 - if you elect Hillary there is a good chance you might loose. She is polarizing, disliked and bad under pressure. She is willing to fragment the party to win and when push comes to shove she will pull every string she has.

If - and answer this honestly - she wins only on Super delegates - who are not voted for but rather old line Dems beholding to nobody - will Hillary have bypassed the will of the rank and file party in order to win the nomination? What will the impact of that be on her general election chances? What will be the impact of that level of destruction in the party? Those who view the war as the primary issue don''t like her, the right hates her and the african americans will feel disenfranchised. At what price is her nomination worth it?

[jimmyc1955]

Rowdy Texan - THEY WERE NATIONAL CABLE ADs.

So lets make this simple for you - National means everywhere. State by state (much more expensive and complicated) is no everywhere. Obama''s team checked with the Dem election officals who approved the ad and said it wasn''t a violation of the rules.

That whole reading thing comes in handy if you try it.

[alanrobisch]

This is his typical stance on major issues, a vote of ''''Present'''' or no vote at all!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by RowdyTexan2 at 05:52 PM : Feb 17, 2008

Rowdy I hate to break it to you but most voters don''t care. They see Hillary as part of the old not the new and don''t necessarily want to go back to the clinton years which were not the best of times for the democratic party or liberal causes