Florida's plan to hold a re-vote is falling apart:
"We researched every potential alternative process -- from caucuses to county conventions to mail-in elections -- but no plan could come anywhere close to being viable in Florida," Congresswoman Karen Thurman, chair of the Florida Democratic Party, said in a memo to voters."We made a detailed case to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, but we were denied."
This is definitely good news for Obama. With a re-vote he would have run the risk of having Hillary win by a large margin allowing her to scoop up a good number of delegates. Now that can't happen.
Before I was advocating that Obama might want to accept seating the Florida delegation based on the primary results if the delegates were each given only a half vote (this is what the Republicans did). But now, the fact that there can't be a re-vote changes everything. The Obama campaign should dig in its heels and refuse to seat the Florida delegation based on the primary results under any circumstances or formula.
The rules are on Obama's side. Florida broke the rules and it's their fault. In particular, Florida's Governor Charlie Crist and the Florida state legislature are the ones to blame. Obama followed the rules and the rules say that the previous vote was invalid. Those votes don't count and they never will.
What Obama should agree to is to seat a Florida delegation whose makeup matches the breakdown in the final pledged delegate total. That way Florida doesn't have any impact on the race whatsoever.
Michigan is also a can of worms. Marc Ambinder brought up up a darn good point:
The proposed primary re-vote legislation in Michigan prevents those who've voted in the Republican primary from voting in the re-vote.Fair enough, right?
But about 32% of the those who voted in the GOP primary, according to the exit polls, were Democrats or independents.
It's a fair bet that many of them were Obama supporters, as he was not on the original Michigan ballot.
There's no way that Obama should agree to anything like this that would put him at a disadvantage in a Michigan re-vote. He can easily dig in his heels and insist that the Michigan delegation also be apportioned based on the pledged delegate count so that it can't affect the final outcome.
If I'm Obama, I'm in no mood to compromise on any of this. The status quo favors him and he would do just as well to go all the way to the convention with no resolution on this issue at all. The fallacious arguments that somehow the voters of Florida and Michigan are going to punish the Democratic nominee come November just don't hold any water to me. Floridians and Michiganders will rightly blame their governors and their state legislatures for getting them into this mess in the first place, not Barack Obama. Florida is trending Republican anyway so the Democrats aren't likely to win there no matter what they do. If the voters of Michigan want to vote for McCain so they can ship more of their jobs overseas then so be it.
Obama followed the rules and there is clearly no way that re-votes can be held without putting him at an unfair disadvantage. Just because Hillary is losing she shouldn't get to rewrite the rules of this game.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
2008 Presidential Race
Tags: Democratic presidential campaign, Florida, Michigan
Comments (4)
There was never any real ch... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Jim Addison | March 18, 2008 5:05 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There was never any real chance of "do-overs." That would have required agreement between the campaigns AND raising the money for the costs, either of which would have been a tall order on its own.
The Democratic voters who showed up to vote in Michigan and Florida expected their votes to be counted. They did nothing wrong - as you point out, it was the state governments and parties (in Florida, the Republicans FORCED the date) who violated the DNC rules - and yet it is they who are being penalized by the lack of representation.
If the DNC and Obama fought to make sure their votes did NOT count, it's hard to see why they would direct their ire at their local officials. Voters knew the status of the dispute before the primaries; if they showed up anyway, they were in effect endorsing the idea.
1. Posted by Jim Addison | March 18, 2008 5:05 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 18, 2008 05:05
2. Posted by Steve Crickmore | March 18, 2008 9:30 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I've thought this over an my solution would be a DNC poll committee, with Democrat neutrals and representatives of both major candidates..Pay Rasmussen, Gallup and maybe one or two others, a little extra to do a poll on the day of the pre-announced day of polling..Candidates campaign for a week in advance..Al polls are announced and the results with the mean average are publicized, with any dissent noted..As the Michigan polls are presently split 50/50 between Obama and Clinton there shouldn't be too much of a swing and we could a least move-on.
In Florida, Clinton has about 15% lead over Obama.I expect with a week's campaigning that would come down let's say 10%. Perhaps even a projections of the turnout could be made for the popular vote bragging rights. I know it is a compromise measure, and undemocratic and maybe even illegal, but I think such a procedure would give everyone a pretty accurate delegate result, almost as fair and effective as any cumbersome and by now too late and expensive redone primaries.
The other advantage is that the two candidates could be seen seriously to campaign soon in these two states, which the Democrats are likely to need in November to defeat McCain..
2. Posted by Steve Crickmore | March 18, 2008 9:30 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 18, 2008 09:30
3. Posted by Larkin![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://wizbangpolitics.com/nav-commenters.gif)
| March 18, 2008 2:08 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The Democratic voters who showed up to vote in Michigan and Florida expected their votes to be counted.
A large number of Michigan voters who would have voted in the Democratic primary instead voted in the Republican primary because they knew their votes wouldn't count otherwise. Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot. Likewise, a lot of Florida voters didn't bother to vote in the Dem primary because they knew those votes wouldn't count.
To then now count the votes for those contests disenfranchises those who didn't vote believing that the party rules would be followed. Those contests don't reflect the will of those voters so they therefore cannot be considered accurate.
In addition, it will be impossible to maintain order in the 2012 primaries if Florida and Michigan are allowed to get away with moving their primaries up. There has to be a penalty for breaking the rules.
3. Posted by Larkin![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://wizbangpolitics.com/nav-commenters.gif)
| March 18, 2008 2:08 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 18, 2008 14:08
4. Posted by mantis | March 18, 2008 5:38 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The Democratic voters who showed up to vote in Michigan and Florida expected their votes to be counted.
Oh please. The media talked endlessly running up to those primaries about how the DNC had stripped their delegates, and they in effect would not matter. The Democratic voters who showed up to vote in Michigan and Florida hoped that the party would figure out a way for their votes to count, maybe. Acting like they had no idea that their states had broken the rules and what the consequences were is ridiculous.
4. Posted by mantis | March 18, 2008 5:38 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 18, 2008 17:38