DNC panel agrees to seat Michigan, Florida

[Ron Burgundy]

Politico - The Michigan and Florida delegations will be seated at the Democratic convention this summer. The question now is whether Senator Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign will continue fighting until then.

The Democratic National Committee Rules and Bylaws Committee agreed today to seat the full delegations from both states, but each delegate – including superdelegates – will only receive a half-vote.

This means the “magic number” of delegates necessary to clinch the Democratic nomination has gone up from 2,026 to 2,118.

While the RBC's decision cut into Senator Barack Obama's delegate lead, it did not affect the underlying dynamic of the race.

The final votes on Michigan and Florida came after the committee disappeared for a three-hour private lunch in the middle of the day.

Both campaigns accepted the ruling on Florida, which used the results of Clinton's January 29 primary victory there to allocate delegates.

But the Clinton campaign emphatically disagreed with a Michigan decision that tried to split the difference between Clinton's January 15 victory and the fact that Obama did not appear on the ballot.

The Florida decision allocates 52.5 pledged delegate votes to Clinton, 33.5 to Obama, and 6.5 to former Sen. John Edwards. Clinton will receive 34.5 pledged delegates from Michigan and Obama will get 29.5.
“I am stumped that we have the gall and chutzpah to substitute our judgment for 600,000 voters.” Harold Ickes, an RBC member and Clinton senior adviser, told the committee right before it voted to approve the Michigan plan.

“Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the Credentials Committee,” he continued, as pro-Clinton elements of the crowd started chanting “DENVER! DENVER! DENVER!”

The Credentials Committee is a body that will meet in July to send a final report on delegations for a vote on the convention floor.

After the meeting, Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson confirmed that Clinton “reserved the right” to take it that far, but that Senator Clinton “will want to confer with her supporters in Michigan and others across the country” before making a decision.

The Obama campaign was more sanguine.

“We're extremely gratified that the commission agreed on a fair solution that will allow Michigan and Florida to participate in the convention,” said Campaign Manager David Plouffe. “We appreciate their efforts, and those of the party leadership of both states, to bring this resolution about.”

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said Saturday's decision “was not made easily or lightly.”

“But after listening to oral arguments made by the complainants, state parties and both presidential campaigns, we believe this to be the most fair and equitable solution allowed within the rules,” he said.

“The committee arrived at its decision with three basic principles in mind. One, that we must be fair to the voters in both states. Two, that we must be fair to both campaigns who abided by the rules in good faith and three, that we must be fair to the 48 states that followed the rules,” he added.

Dean opened the day with a speech that appealed for party unity and, in a nod to Clinton supporters, criticized what he called “sexist” comments made by members of the media and racism experienced by the Obama campaign.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who will chair the Democratic National Convention in August, was also pleased by the results and focused on uniting the party..

“I look forward to a historic convention focused on defeating John McCain in November and putting a Democrat in the White House.”

Both state parties were also pleased.

“It was a long day and it's been a long, long time coming, but finally it's official. Florida's votes count,” said Karen Thurman, chair of the Florida Democratic Party.

"Today's decision is a fair resolution that recognizes both the importance of Michigan's vote for a Democratic president and the primary that took place in January," said Michigan Democratic Party Chairman (and RBC member) Mark Brewer. "We can now move full steam ahead in our efforts to ensure a Democratic president that puts Michigan jobs and working families ahead of the big oil and corporate special interests of Bush, McCain, and the Republican Party."

The Florida decision passed unanimously by a vote of 27 to 0 after the Clinton campaign's preferred solution – which would given full votes to the state's delegates – failed by a vote of 15 to 12, a vote closer than most observers expected going in.

The Michigan plan passed by a vote of 19 to 8.

Thirteen of the 30 RBC members have publicly endorsed Clinton, while eight have openly backed Obama.

Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL), who appeared before the committee on behalf of Obama, called the result a “huge victory” for both the Florida state party and Obama. “Our voices were heard.”

But not everyone was satisfied with Saturday's outcome. Hundreds of Clinton supporters who had originally gathered outside made their way to the doors of the conference room where the parties were meeting and voiced their displeasure.

One Clinton supporter, Harriott Christian, of New York, said the party had lost her vote as a result of the decision.

“The Democrats don't want me so I don't want them,” Christian said. “I'll be voting for John McCain. And I got news for you, John McCain will be the next president of the United States.”

source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080601/pl_politico/10732 [link]

[Scrum]

Some of Hilary's supporters went off the deep end on camera today.

YouTube Video

YouTube Video

YouTube Video

[David Octavius]

Nice vids

the first vid - the woman is from Manhattan, she may say she was/is 2nd class but I can tell she is money and she sounded crazy. New Yorkers are not that insane

the third vid - that woman talking about how she doesn't want the republicans in the White House so who will she vote for? McCain...wow

[Scrum]

Ickes is such an idiot.

YouTube Video

Nobody hijacked the election, you guys just don't want to follow the rules you agreed to in the beginning.

[WickedLou9]

This whole Clinton push to seat these delegates strikes me as particularly dishonest. I think she had this calculated from day 1. When these states moved thier primaries the DNC gave them a punishment which all of the candidates agreed to honor. All of the candidates EXCEPT Clinton took their names off the ballots in those states. Right away, WTF? Now how can you seat those delegates in any fair way when Obama didn't get to campaign in those states. Clinton has been trying to frame this as a civil rights issue which is particularly distasteful to me because it's obviously not being done for civil rights it's being done because it's Clinton's only hope at making it to the convention. She has really rubbed me the wrong way about all this.

[goldenponderbob]

So, after all that, what, exactly got settled?

Didn't the DNC chairman say he wanted the thing settled post haste?

If the thing ain't settled, do it not make sense that Hill's quest will still have legs by convention time?

A real,honest to goodness, winner take all, nominating convention attended by "fluid" delegates s still in the cards?

That would be quite a show; complete with all the crazy people going nuts on live TV.

[6SpeedTA95]

Those states need to revote of they're going to count the delegates.

[kinggovernor]

here is what happens when you try to create the perfect system that is equitable to all parties, you make no one happy.

[goldenponderbob]

What about the timimg of this quasi-decision? Just hours before round 6/2!

If O locks it up, numericallly; is it then settled?

I'm expecting she goes on, per her RFK suppostion (exactly as if she hadn't rethought her original position), no matter what!

I think she knows more about what's likely to happen next than the numbers show.

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Those states need to revote of they're going to count the delegates.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Those states need to revote of they're going to count the delegates.

Just playing devil's advocate:

A revote can be seen as undemocratic too - throwing away the votes of so many people just so other people we "think" didn't vote or didn't have a real choice can now have a chance. This degrades those who took the time out to vote for their candidate...again just playing devils advocate

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

Just playing devil's advocate:

A revote can be seen as undemocratic too - throwing away the votes of so many people just so other people we "think" didn't vote or didn't have a real choice can now have a chance. This degrades those who took the time out to vote for their candidate...again just playing devils advocate

IMO the most undemocratic decision was to give Obama delegates he didn't earn

[motivez]

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

IMO the most undemocratic decision was to give Obama delegates he didn't earn

Yeah, I'm not sure how that happened exactly. They basically took several of Hillary's and said, "Here, have a few of these." .. that isn't right

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by motivez

Yeah, I'm not sure how that happened exactly. They basically took several of Hillary's and said, "Here, have a few of these." .. that isn't right

In fairness she didn't win them legitimately to begin with so they really weren't hers anyway. She should have taken her name off the ballot like all of the other candidates. It was a dishonest thing to do and it speaks to her character.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

In fairness she didn't win them legitimately to begin with so they really weren't hers anyway. She should have taken her name off the ballot like all of the other candidates. It was a dishonest thing to do and it speaks to her character.

Having one person to vote for in Michigan is hardly democratic

[motivez]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

In fairness she didn't win them legitimately to begin with so they really weren't hers anyway. She should have taken her name off the ballot like all of the other candidates. It was a dishonest thing to do and it speaks to her character.

It's just as dishonest, if not more, for him to accept delegates from a contest where no one voted for him.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's just as dishonest, if not more, for him to accept delegates from a contest where no one voted for him.

Perhaps your right..but this should be moot anyway, their state legislature broke the rules, they should be punished in accordance to the DNC rules, therefore ANY deviations (like trying to seat them) is dishonest to all the states that followed the rules

[motivez]

It's a hard issue because MI and FL are extremely important in the general election. I mean, on the one hand, yes, they violated party rules.. but even so, millions of people still turned out to vote so their voices would be heard in the selection process

MI is obviously the worst of the two cases, since Obama's name wasn't on the ballot, if any should have a revote, it should be MI..

However in FL, they weren't allowed to campaign there, but in this day and age that doesn't mean as much as it used to with multiple 24 hour cable networks, youtube, the internets, and whatnot.. those people had a chance to be informed about which candidate they liked if they wanted to be

I think if the party disenfranchises them from letting them help the pick the nominee, they risk the general election

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's just as dishonest, if not more, for him to accept delegates from a contest where no one voted for him.

IMO they should not have counted any of the votes because the whole process was invalidated from day 1... but Clinton was thr