Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson calls upon the DNC to rescind its recent ruling "unseating" all of Florida's delegates to next year's National Convention because of the state's moving its primary date to January 29th in violation of party rules. Nelson writes in USA Today:
The issue before us is simple: It's a case of fundamental rights vs. party rules.It's ironic, because national Democrats just celebrated the 42nd anniversary of the Voting Rights Act by unveiling a plan that "ensures all eligible Americans are able to vote and have their vote counted."
It's ironic, because Florida has seen its share of disputed elections and disenfranchised voters, from hanging chads in 2000 to faulty machines in Sarasota last year.
And it's ironic, because this year, after heartbreaking losses in 2000 and 2004, Democrats supposedly are united in their determination to win the presidency. That's hard to do when you tell 4 million Florida Democrats they don't count.
Read the rest at the link above. Although the primary was changed by the Republican state legislature, give Florida Democrats credit: they haven't flinched in standing up to the national committee. However, it's hard to claim their voting rights are being violated, since they knew the rules and the penalties beforehand.
Besides, you all know as well as I do that whoever wins the Democratic nomination will control the convention and seat the Florida delegation with full voting rights. They would be nuts not to. At that point, the issue would be effectively out of sight until the 2012 cycle, and no Presidential candidate is going to allow a gratuitous slap at a potentially key state.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2008 Presidential Race, Democrats, Florida, Primaries
Tags: Democrat, Florida, presidential campaign, primaries
Comments (3)
Iowa and New Hampshire have... (Below threshold)1. Posted by kim | August 31, 2007 10:52 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Iowa and New Hampshire have become absurd. Remember? McCain won New Hampshire. Can you imagine him running against Kerry?
=================================
1. Posted by kim | August 31, 2007 10:52 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 31, 2007 10:52
2. Posted by Jayemay | August 31, 2007 4:52 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There is one possiblity where the presumptive nominee may not seat the Florida delagation. If the contest were close enough that the Florida delagation could swing the nomination to another candidate, they'd remain unseated, and we'd be treated to hours of entertainment from various camps within the Democrats brininging up variations of the 2000 Florida debacle again.
But that won't happen, I honestly think Hillary's could run the table (of state pluralities).
2. Posted by Jayemay | August 31, 2007 4:52 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 31, 2007 16:52
3. Posted by Jim Addison | August 31, 2007 5:21 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Good points, Jayemay.
The only scenario in which I could see that happening is if one candidate controls a plurality of delegates, but not a majority - but seating the Florida delegation would give them the majority. The opponents might unite to prevent that - but only if they felt they could defeat the leader (presumably, Hillary), since the repercussions for failure would be political death.
Oddly enough, though, it has happened almost that way. In 1972, McGovern won the California primary, which was "winner-take-all" despite his reforms (the McGovern Commission was formed after the 1968 debacle to ensure more "grassroots" representation among delegates, and "proportionate" awarding of delegates from primaries was one of their principles), which gave him a majority of delegates. Opposition arose, fearing McGovern would lead them to being overrun in November, claiming it was against his own reforms not to award the California delegates proportionately - which, not coincidentally, would have meant McGovern no longer had a majority, so of course his delegates defeated the proposal.
One of the leaders of that "Stop McGovern" movement at the convention, by the way, was Jimmy Carter, then Governor of Georgia, who would go on to win the next cycle's nomination - against my previous assertion that failed opposition on credentials leads to political death.
In any event, Hillary appears well-placed to run the table, or come very close to it, rendering our speculations moot. At Intrade, the people who put their money on the line see her as the odds-on favorite in all the early states despite current poll rankings showing Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina all competitive.
As a confirmed political junkie, I always hope for some interesting developments at the conventions, but ever since the Democrats' 1968 Chicago "event," they have all been scripted down to the minute and stripped of all suspense.
3. Posted by Jim Addison | August 31, 2007 5:21 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 31, 2007 17:21