Just curious, but isn't Corzine's state in financial troubles. How would Pennsylvanians feel about him sending millions of dollars to other states?

The DNC made the rules very clear to Florida and Michigan that if they upped their primary dates their delegates would not count. The candidates agreed to the rules of the game.  They did not campaign in those states and Obama's name was not on the Michigan ballot. However Hillary went to Florida to the night of the primary to thank Flordia for supporting her???? So why are are they in such an uproar? Why now is the Clinton camp whining about Florida and Michigan not having a say in the primary election(rhetorical ?) Now Governor Corzine wants to spend 30 million dollars to re-do the primaries. There a folks out there who are homeless, without healthcare, losing their homes and what about the Katrina victims.  His proposed 30 million dollars could be put to good use by Brad Pitt in New Orleans building new homes for the Katrina victims. I guess he feels it would be better used rewarding two states for breaking the rules. I wonder what promises have been made to him? And who made the promises the Clinton or McCain camp?

WHAT TO DO WITH FLORIDA & MICHIGAN.

1. Since both states violated the party rules there should be some consequence or we will conform what a lot of people
think about the party-- that we’re permissive and indulgent. That said, why not have a new primary but cut the delegates in half.
Thats what the other party did and we didn’t hear any complaints about that. It seems they at least got that right.

2. Since Hillary would probably win Florida 55/45 and Obama would probably win Michigan 55/45 (remember over 40% of the voters in Michigan went out
in freezing temps to vote uncommitted, and with Obama’s name not even on the ballot). Why not divide the votes evenly and give each candidate
half the delegates. This would save the party 20-30 million dollars that could be used against McCain. Lets not waste money because Florida and Michigan broke the rules.

Finally, many of us have donated to the candidate of our choice to advance their programs, not to make good on Florida and Michigans bad decisions.
It would make some of us think twice about giving again. Any primaries should be paid for by the DNC or soft money.

Wait, what is this about, Jon Corzine raising money for for primary do-overs in FL and MI? how about using that money to help bail your own state of out the perpetual debt your political cronies put it in? Just a thought from a tax-victim in the great state of NJ!

If Clinton supporters are running the show here, does anyone suppose that this will be fair? or that either democracy or the democratic party will be served by it????????

Why not let this political process play out as originally planed?  If Florida/Michigan are allowed to re-do this, I promise you, Hillary will loose because Obama's supporters, especially African Americans,will stay away from the poles in droves.  They  will see it as another ploy by Whites to get what they want and another means of being disinfranchised. I have always voted no matter how distasteful the candidate might have been. However, if this process is played out the way it seems to be playing out, I too am going to take a pass. Bill Clinton needs to shut up talking about a Hillary/Obama ticket.  I would loose all respect for him if he did this and so would others.  So, forget it Bill.

No way!  The rules were set in place and these states decided to ignore them.  They violated party rule and should have to deal with the consequences. What kind of precedence does this set for the future?  The DNC is the national party, and if a candidate chooses to run for presidency on behalf of them, they should honor their rules and regulations. As far as I'm concerned, Hillary can run on an independent ticket and take her supporters with her.  She does not represent the #1 DNC principle, and they should "denounce and reject" her as a contender under their ticket.  She is trying to usurp the DNC and this should not be tolerated.  Howard Dean is absolutely correct in taking his stance. The states of Michigan and Florida gambled and lost.  To do ANYTHING other than seat the delegates as a 50-50 split will reward them for bad behavior.  The only way to democratically solve their tantrums for disobeying the rules is to have their votes count yet remain non-influential.  No-revote!  It's a waste of time and money (on behalf of the candidates, sponsors, and voters).  These states must be reprimanded in some way, and to allow them to re-vote will create a backlash among all the other states who followed the rules. A re-vote will be unfair and undemocratic.  Seat the votes 50-50 so that they will have no influence.  This will preserve the DNC's integrity and allow the states to have a say during the convention, and this my friends is a generous offer. Take it or leave it.  

It's not worth disenfranchising millions of other voters throughout the country, especially the young and newly registered voters.

Sorry Florida and Michigan, but this is a case where the sum trumps the parts.  Florida will most likely vote republican in the general election and Michigan will vote democrat anyway.  I say the end justifies the means, because anything otherwise will most definitely turn away the young and new voters, independents and cross-over republicans- yet alone the Black voters.  They represent at least half the Democratic voters, whereas Florida and Michigan represent about 5-15% of the democratic voters.  Is it worth losing 50+% of the voters or 5-15%?  That is the ultimate question.

I say no deal - clearly this is NOT about the democratic process but rather a push to benefit Hillary Clinton politically. It's becoming painfully apparent that this whole action to re-do Fl and Mi is NOT about the voters' voice but a rather pathetic attempt to game the system to ensure Hillary Clinton winning by any means necessary. If neutral sources had offered to raise money, I would have been fine. however, when you have folks with a clear vested interest in seeing a result that favors them politically offering to raise money for a re-do, that raises a red flag. Further, where is the penalty that would dissuade states from trying to pull this stunt again? The Florida case my be slightly understandable since it was the Republican legislature that led the move, however I'm not sure how innocent the Florida Dem party officials were in that action - seems to me they didn't put up much of a fight and defended the move up.

So NJ governor Corzine and Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell -- both strong Clinton supporters -- agreed to raise half of what he estimated as a $30 million dollar price tag to redo Florida and Michigan primaries.

I would think that they would be out raising every dime that they can to help people in their own.

People and projects in NJ and PA...need money. I would think that Corzine and Rendell would be raising all the money that they can to help their own states.

If Clinton is president, we can expect all tax payers will pay for the kick backs that NJ and PA will get through Government funded projects. So we  all will pay.

There is something sick and sad about this.

So Hillary's cronies are trying to buy her some delegates. Too bad, Hillary would still have to win all states including MI and FL with 60% of the vote just to catch up to Obama.

Her run is over. It is getting sad watching as they try to game the system.

I'm Curious.  

Does anybody think there would be as much talk of a Michigan and Florida redo if the roles were reversed and Clinton were ahead in pledged delegates?

have you noticed that this plan is not being put forward by the DNC or the Obama campaign?
There is absolutely no need for any action. It's desperate a Clinton ploy to overturn the results if the race goes as everyone knows it will. Without FL & MI Obama will still be ahead by 150-200 delegates by June and the supers will easily put him over the top. Then the FL & MI delegates can be seated w/o changing the outcome.
If the Clintons succeed in getting their redo they're gambling the super-delegates will be frozen until after the re-dos and, somehow, the Clintons will catch up. HOWEVER, in reality it'll be a wash and we'll have collectively jerked around until the summer and the party's unity will be in who knows what state.
In short, this monster is willing to cannibalize the party to become president.

Since Senator Obama is now being exposed for the duplicitous liar that he is the "Change you can believe in" slogan needs to be replaced.  I humbly suggest the following:

Obama '08:  "I agree with Senator Clinton."

or,

Obama '08:  "Present!"

This is a joke.  Sad.  The party seems bent in
delaying the obvious.  Mr' Obama nomination

Well, despite who you support you can't possibly be against a re-vote in these states.  Everyone's vote should count.

I'm an Obama supporter, but I'm happy to see these do-overs. I find it hysterical that Hillary has been pushing for the votes to be counted, but only if they count as is - or with Primaries...i.e. Only if they count HER way. I'd be interested to see what would happen if this was an Obama state.  Either way, I'm happy to see that they are finally, hopefully, going to resolve this. The votes will probably be really close - Obama may even win Michigan...I mean in the last one, the choices were Hillary or "not committed" (i.e. "anyone BUT Hillary) and she only won like 55% to 45%...anyway, in the end, the math will likely look the same.

im an obama supporter and im all for this....hopefully more governors offer to raise the money....hopefully my governor ted strickland will...

If the rules are going to be changed, then I think Ohio and Texas and California should be done over because Hillary won those states.  It's a double standard.  You change the rules for  the benefit of one, then change it for everything else.

Why not a caucus?

Why does Hillary get to dictate how the democratic party should operate?  She is after all, someone running for president, why does she not need to follow the rules.

She said that "she" does not "like" caucuses - only because Obama's team has figured them out and how they work, her team hasn't.

"Bill" Clinton had to deal with caucuses, and so has "every" demecratic presidential hopeful.  

I think it is "weak" for Howard Dean and the Democratic party to let her say how the game is played, choosing to ignore/argue against, what works against her, and "only" accept what works "for" her.

Even if they do a complete re-do of primaries in both states, if it does not come out in her favor she will complain that something wasn't fair.


It's time to stop letting Hillary think she can run the show, she needs to be put in her place, and told she is running "for" President, and is not running the "Democratic National Committee"!

btw, She also needs to learn some basic manners, again, with Wyoming, there was no "congratultions" from her to Obama .......... that's just unseemly/unPresidential!

Marie Smyers
Rochester, Nh

Yes, redo the votes, then strip them by half like the Republicans did. That way you still have a consequence of jumping the primary rules set forth. The only questionable part is that these Governors are not neutral. But giving the voters of Florida and Michigan a real chance to participate is more democratic. Just reduce the number of delegates by half.

The “Un-Civics” Lesson Dilemma

While the Democratic elders wring their hands about what do about the Michigan and Florida delegations, as a fourth Grade teacher I have a much larger problem to deal with. How do I explain to the enthusiastic bunch of fourth graders in my class, that everything I had taught them about the presidential election and political process was a big, fat lie?


When Senator Obama’s picture appeared on the front page of the Washington Post the day after the Iowa caucuses, my class of predominately African American, high poverty level students were fascinated with the possibility of a “President Obama”. They asked endless questions about what a caucus was, did all those white people really vote for Senator Obama, how do campaigns work, how long was the campaign going to take and who would decide who would be in the election in November. My explanation, that each candidate had to campaign for people to vote for them in each state and then a certain number “delegates” would be awarded, was simple and straightforward enough for the class to understand. However, I made the mistake of teaching them that when all the primaries and caucuses were over, the candidate with the most delegates would be nominated at the Democratic convention in Denver this summer.


My students have been avidly following the presidential election process, watching some of the debates, following the voting in each state and excitedly greeting me the morning after a primary with “Obama won, he got lots more delegates last night”. When the term “Super delegate” began to be tossed about on the news programs, I explained who they were and what role they had played in previous conventions. Now that Senator Clinton has decided continue her fight for the nomination with a strategy of convincing enough Super delegates into awarding her the nomination despite the fact that she will never have a majority of pledged delegates, I have a serious dilemma. How do I explain that even if Senator Obama wins the most elected delegates, the most votes and the most states, he won’t be the Democratic nominee?

Can any of the Democratic Party leadership give me some advice on how to respond to my students when they ask me why this is happening? How about an explanation for why playing by the rules and winning fair and square isn’t enough? Or more importantly, why should they ever bother voting when they’re old enough if their votes won’t make a hill of beans difference in the end? Since Senator Clinton is in the “Solutions” business, maybe she can come up with some credible answers to those questions that a bunch of fourth graders might buy because I certainly can’t. Great Un-Civics Lesson you‘re providing the next generation Senator Clinton!

People! WAKE UP!

How many people cannot see that this is wrong! wrong! wrong!

Do you think our founding fathers envisioned a day where elections could be bought??? rigged??? re-done???

'We the people' need exactly the kind of change Obama is offering and look who's standing in the way. The wealthy and the well-connected - who are quite content with the status quo.

Hillary Clinton agreed to the rules for Michigan and Florida in advance. End of story. End of spinning.

i still think they should count results as they are for florida and just assign deligates however michigan is a different story.. thats where the real conflict is, since obama was uncommited they could either have a redo or just split the 40% who voted uncommited to all ppl who ran that time equally!!!

I think a revote would be wrong since many of them voted Republican instead of democrat to throw off the Republican nominee. There votes for Hillary should stand.

stick to the rules.

With all the biased talk about how to handle seating the delegates from Michigan and Florida - I though it would be interesting to see what the public thinks is the best way to resolve the issue.

Share your opinion and view the current results.

Participate in Poll: https://howtohandlemichiganandflorida.dabbledb.com/page/howtohandlemichiganandflorida/EwLtZtre

I watched http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/2354666823546668 as Edward G. Rendell, Pennsylvania's 45th Governor said the Democratic Party WILL nullify our right to vote, if Senator Barack Obama, should win the most contests between now and Denver. He said Hillary Cllinton is the given choice of the Party elite. He further iterated our votes don't count! Even should Senator Barak Obama, win all the remaining contests, he won't win. They've already determined this!

The Democratic National Committee says Black, Brown, White, Red, Yellow, Old, and Young American voters, Obama supporters votes do not matter.

Whoa!!! Since when does my vote not count? And since when can the Democratic party just decide we are going to vote for Hillary Clinton, because that is who they decided we should have.

The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. The United States Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787, by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Mr. Rendell is governor of Pennsylvania, and advocates denial of the right to vote containted in the Bill of Rights of that Constitution.

Has Senator Clinton placed herself above the Constitution of the United States?

Govenor Ed Rendell, of Pennsylvania, left no dout the Democratic National Commitee Super Delegates slithered into that dank back room and decided to enthrone Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, as their candidate.

History teaches horrific lessons that it will repeat itself. Has America defeated itself? Have we become that which we dispise? An election without choice, without a recognized right to vote and have that vote count?

This is not about black, brown, yellow, red, or white. It is about our Constitutional rights, which the Democratic Party apparently is willing to strip us of. Our right to vote is hard won. Many of us still live that fought the fight to cast our votes, now I'm having to accept that it was all illusion. What did we win? Nothing if all our votes do not count.

I do not accept this. This is not a dictatorship.

When U.S. Senator Barack Obama, Ill., wins the popular and delegate counts minus the "super delegates", he will be the nominee of the Democratic National Party. This is America, and you cannot order us to accept Hillary Clinton. When you do, it will be the death knell of America.

This is not a dictatorship! Free Elections 2008!

Of course, Clinton supporters will help to finance the redos in Florida and Michigan so long as they are not done until June -- this allows Clinton to stay in the race until June (will destroy the Democrats chance).  Why not hold the primaries in latter part of April?

this is crazy, if Obama fail in Fl and Michigan I will vote for J Mc Cain because Clinton, edward and obama agrees not to campaing in those states

Isn't that NICE?? Our State [NJ] is going bankrupt, and facing huge increases in tolls and huge cuts in services, and our Governor has the time to raise money for Florida and Michigan. My mind boggles...

No matter how things play out this year, after the dust settles from the November elections, there needs to be a bipartisan look at the WHOLE nominating system.  The way that it is done now makes it open to all kinds of problems like this.  

In my opinion, the primaries start too early and are spread out way too mutch.  

Florida and Michigan should not redo their primaries.  They did the right thing by moving them up, and they can be confident their delegates will be seated no matter what.  The Democrats cannot afford to lose both states to the Republicans.

By holding new primaries, they would be legitimizing the DNC's corrupt and undemocratic promotion of New Hampshire and Iowa at the expense of the rest of the country.  They would also do a disservice to all of the conscientious voters who voted the first time.

Yeah...of course they will.  Why not just man those voting machines yourselves so that when HRC comes out the winner it will be the obvious scam it is.  This whole thing is ridiculous.  There were rules and they broke them--period.  How do you explain to the electorate why you're going back and re-doing the election when this had been decided months ago.  It's Hillary Clinton's power-hungry campaign and it's supporters that are undermining the democratic process.  If she had managed to--you know--win more delegates with being so inevitable and all then the party wouldn't be put throught this.

The Clintons are poison.  It's entertaining though.  Can't wait to see what they come up with next.  

This circus should stop now. Michigan, Florida, just seat the delegates but split it evenly amongst the two candidates. Sure Hillary would not go along, but then again, she accepted the rules as well as the two states did. THis way they are being punished in the way that they can not determine the outcome of the selection and still have their delegates seated, being part of the democratic process. I believe it is a very fair solution, the punishment being that the 2 states don't play a determining role in choosing the candidate. In case new primaries or otherwise are held they even get awarded of not abiding the rules since they will get the change to determine the outcome. THis would be unfair towards the other states

As a Democrat and NJ resident, I am disgusted that Corzine would make such a proposal. NJ is mired in the worst budgetary crisis in memory and Corzine has proposed drastic measures to right the ship. Perhaps, Corzine should raise (or donate from his own massive personal wealth) the money for NEW JERSEY instead of 2 states that deliberately chose to thumb their nose at the DNC and change the date of their primaries.  Michigan and Florida have absolutely no one else to blame other than themselves. If they want a do-over, they should pay for it themselves.

Clinton supporters (aka party insiders) will go to no end to ensure that she the nominee. Sadly, it is these same party insiders that have only put forth 1 winning candidate in nearly 3 decades. Making Hillary the nominee will ensure that this trend continues.

This election is the Democrats election to lose. Unfortunately, nominating Hillary will achieve that unsavory distinction.  Hillary cannot win a national election against McCain. She is too polarizing a figure and will mobilize the GOP base. Her alleged "30 Years" of experience will be exposed by the GOP, Rove et al for the sham that it is. Moreover, playing the experience card won't play against McCain in the general election. He's got both candidates beat in that department. Ulimately, if Hillary is the nominee, McCain will get the independent, moderate white male, and educated voters that are leaning / supporting Obama, and in so doing, win the general election.

I'm amazed that more people don't see through Hillary.  Then again, I guess I shouldn't be amazed...afterall, we did vote Bush into office twice.  Tells you all you need to know about the intelligence and good judgment of our people.  

Perhaps these governors should help raise millions to help poverty in their states.

Hmmmmmm isn't funny that two of Hillary's biggest supporters are willing to pay for two states that have nothing to do with them.  Add another scandal to the Clinton name!

Whatever happened to the rules are the rules? All high ranking parties knew that their constituent's votes would not count and no delegates would be awarded if they voted early, now  . . . out of convenience (and need of a delegate catch-up); The rules change for ???????????????

HEY, THIS WOULD BE GREAT FOR FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN TO GET BACK INTO THE SPOTLIGHT WHERE THEY BELONG. THIS TWO STATES ARE NEEDED NOW, TO END THIS DEADLOCK BETWEEN OBAMA AND CLINTON. THANK YOU TO BOTH GOVERNORS

The DNC stated that FL and MI votes would not be counted because both states moved their primary dates.

All voters in both states knew this prior to voting.

Now Clinton Supporters want to change the rules.  Rules that the Clinton campaign agreed to.

If a "redo" is apparent I will change my affiliation and vote for Obama.!!!!

If you don't like the rules of the game change them in the middle of the game!!!!!

Why an I not surprised

Your station has becomed a propaganda machine aginst Hillary. From Joe in the morning to Keith at night you go on and on with so much anti Hillary, Joe's face shocks when he talks about Hillary, and Keith sounds so unfair and partisan that I have changed to CNN. When MSNBC started I though it was a fresh air alternative to CNN but now I feel that the you have lost your fairness and I am back with the same same CNN.

My first thought when reading the headline...who do these men support for nomination?  Hillary of course.  That is why we should now try to change the "rules" of the DNC.  Much like a parent that will not stand firm, the child becomes spoiled expecting that the universe revolves around them--only to discover later in life (the general election) that those negatively affected by such behavior are only too happy to administer the disciple that the parent didn't have the strength to administer.  Here we go.  Will the DNC change their rules and thereby become irrelevant to the average voter?

RE MAIL REVOTE:  The proposal put forth so far is to mail all "registered democratic" voters a ballot and have them return it.

Would not this procedure exclude those independents and Republicans who stayed away from the polls in the first votes (because they believed their vote would not count--due to the invalidity of the primary)?  

How would those persons be included in the "redo"?  Isn't it likely a large percentage of them would have voted for Barack Obama?

Is a MAIL REDO at its core, unfair?

DO-OVER=FRAUD=TYPICAL FLORIDA=TYPICAL CLINTON!!!

What happens 4 years from now when EVERY state decides to change their date?

Where's the penalty for breaking the rules?

SPLIT THE DELEGATES, EVEN STEVEN, AND MOVE ON!!!

Next time Florida and Michigan...FOLLOW THE DAMN RULES!!!

I am tired of hearing OBAMA.Just what are his accomplishments.NOTHING.He was elected in 2006 as a senator and he thinks he has the knowledge to run our country.He has all the young people believing in him with his Change and yes we can.His change is a black White House.He would not know where to srart.Then his wife Michelle saying that she has never been proud of America until know.Obama and her got to go to Harvard for nothing.Did any white person get to go Harvard for free on the government.Obama has said that he never got onto Washington but he knew it needed a change.What was he doing all this time Sleeping.

The people of the states of Florida and Michigan need to have a voice.  Party leaders for the DNC and the states made a big error, but it is time to solve it and not disenfranchise the voters.  We all need a convention in Denver that we can be proud of and that will lead to the election of a Democratic president.  We are all too likley to have a mess if this isn't handled well and thoroughly now.  I believe the Fl vote should stand as is and delegates be seated accordingly, but Obama probably won't allow it.  So let's have a vote in both states.  Let's get past being "right" about past disagreements and find a way for the people to have a voice.  Tell me where and I'll send a contribution to support new votes in both MI and FL.  Thanks to the Governors for your leadership.

What's all the arguing about?

Clinton won the Fla prinmary by 50% of the vote... so give her 50% of the delgates and give Obama his 33% and let Edwards' 14% and Kucinich 1% be divided 50/50 between the two candidates.  End result: Clinton gets 57% - Obama gets 43% of the total delegates, which should be reduced by half the same way the Republicans reduced the delegate count.

In the same way, Michigan's delegates (reduced by 50%) should be divided 55% to Clinton and 45% to Obama.

But don't give Clinton any bragging rights for either states primaries.  Both states are represented so the GOP can't claim they were disinfranchised; Clinton can't continue to make any fictious claims; no one is out money; and we can put this whole issue to bed.

And you know what?  Obama still has a commanding delegate lead!!!

For those of you that think that Michigan or Florida should not take part in the nomination of a presidential candidate,may I suggest it is because you do not want a fair nomination. It is not the voters that decided to up the date. I understand that the Democratic Party, knowing how the early states can set a trend, thought that Florida, being a much bigger & diverse population would be a better example of how the nation's heart beat goes. We have such a diverse population & it is not as many seniors as you might think. We seldom come accross a native Floridian, even sometimes it is there parents that came here from another state. The people here still have relatives in other states. Businesses have been attracting many diverse people here for jobs.For those of you that do not think the elderly have good judgement, you are so wrong. They have so much experience and have witnessed more of life so they have accumlated wisdom that only time can give you. On the other hand states like Iowa are not near as diverse & are somewhat single minded in comparison. As far as I am concerned it should be New york, California & Florida that should be the early states  where the mix of people that have migrated to these states is much greater. Of course, O'Bama supporters would not like Florida & Michigan to be counted, ( Michigan could go O'Bama's way, but there would always be said of him that he won by hook & crook as it was not a fair election. People are often upset because the candidate had the popular vote but lost to the Electoral College. Imagine how upset they will be if Florida and Michigan are counted out for the nominee. I also think that Florida is not fair as they do not allow independents their voice in choosing whom they would like to see as a candidate. But I also thing that Party memebers should stick to voting for their Parties choice of candidates. Otherwise it corrupts the system, as reported, some Repulbicans are voting in the primary for a Democrat to influence the choice of a candidate they beleive will not win against their Republican candidate.

Unfortunately, these two governors (while they may be well-meaning) are partisans...

Begging the question(s)

1.  Would Corzine and Rendell be making this offer if their candidate was behind in the measures (delegates,popular vote) so far?  We don't know.

2.  Are Corzine and Rendell going to be asking for money back if Obama picks up too many delegates or votes in these states?  We don't know.

Everyone asking for a rules change or an accomodation has a stake in this game at this point.  That is why you don't change rules in the middle of the game.

No, I don't want to disenfranchise these voters but ask yourself who got us into this  mess?

This sets a dangerous precedent in so many different ways.  I don't think we have to just worry about Fl and Mich. walking out under certain circumstances.  I think you have to think about who may stay at home in Nov.

Save the money split the delegates 50/50 that is what will happen.

If Hillary were in the lead this would not even be a discussion.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):