Delegate fight: FL and MI watch

Posted: Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:15 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008, Michigan, Florida

The Wall Street Journal: "One possible outcome that rules-committee members were talking about Wednesday is to seat the states' unpledged superdelegates and half of their pledged delegates. But even that proposal could generate fireworks. The Clinton campaign wants the primary results to be used to determine how the pledged delegates are allocated, a move that could cut Sen. Obama's lead by 40 or 50 votes, by some calculations.”

“Sen. Obama has argued that the delegates be divided evenly, which would preserve his lead. Committee members predicted that Sen. Obama could drop that demand if superdelegates begin drifting to his side after the latest primaries. But the senator's campaign, in a statement Wednesday, said it stands by its position ‘the most equitable resolution is an equal split of the delegates.’”

The Los Angeles Times: "Harold M. Ickes, a Clinton strategist who sits on the DNC's rules committee, said he would argue that Florida and Michigan had been punished enough by the rules that prevented the candidates from campaigning there, and that the party needs to curry favor with voters in these two general-election battlegrounds. Ickes said that seating Florida and Michigan -- and assigning delegates according to the January voting -- was part of a broader strategy to bring Clinton within 100 delegates of Obama. Then she would continue to press her case with superdelegates -- party insiders whose votes will decide the nomination -- that they should give her the nomination because she could pose a stiffer challenge to presumptive GOP nominee John McCain.”

“The rules committee offers the Clinton campaign some built-in advantages. Thirteen members have endorsed her, and just eight are declared Obama backers. One of the committee chairs is Alexis M. Herman, Labor secretary under President Clinton. The committee has wide latitude concerning Florida and Michigan. It could uphold the rules and punishment, seat the entire delegation from each state, split the delegations in half, or even seat all of the superdelegates but only some of the elected delegates."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Am I wrong about this? I am going by Chuck Todd's math that says that even WITH the votes from Michigan and Florida she still won't be able to catch up with him in delegates. What has changed?

Waiting for Obama, NC (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:25 AM)

The Democrats have really screwed over Michigan and Flordia, and for that matter themselves. Florida has always been iffy for a Dem win in the GE, but now Michigan with it's white working class and it's rejection by the Democrats is in play for the Republicans. The so-called Rules Committee is so out of touch that they're at the point of just making things up and hoping nobody notices how badly they screwed up their own primary.

Ross T, Flint MI (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:25 AM)

Dan (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:25 AM)

Why in heaven's name would they seat the superdelegates from those states, but not the elected delegates? That sounds elitist. We're not the top-down party ... or are we?

Seat the elected delegates from Florida ... let a state convention pick delegates from Michigan and DO NOT seat the superdelegates from either state. Simple, fair, and respectful of the voters.

Sen. Tracy Potter, Bismarck (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:27 AM)

Let's only seat the delegates from states that I won. Wow, I will be way ahead of Obama! By the way, that joker did not get a single vote in Michigan. What a loser! Yeah, I signed that document agreeing that Florida and Michigan would not count. So what! I lied. What are you gonna do about it? I have to be the next President! I'm entitled! My husband cheated on me!

Insincerely,

Monica Lewinsky's boyfriend's wife

Obama in 2008. Integrity matters and the Clintons have none.

Sick of corruption, sick of the Clintons (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:30 AM)

If the DNC changes the rules now, after stating we all had to go by the rules, now they are changing the rules mid game, I and my husband have decided to become INDEPENDENTS the next day! We won't be able to vote in primaries in PA, but the DNC will show us, our going by the rules and voting when we were supposed to...does not matter! And Dems who can't follow rules, and WERE warned not to move their dates, and they did so anyway, now will have no punishment for breaking with the party! So what is the point of voting in the next primary here? If they seat MI when HIllary only stayed on the ballot "b/c we don't want the only ones to vote for to be Republicans, the votes won't be counted anyway!", HER WORDS, it shows the DNC does not follow their own rules either, and we will not be a part of a party the breaks its own rules!

coninPA (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:32 AM)

Let them be seated in a fair and equitable way for everyone involved.

Also, it amazes me how people are complaining about AA's voting for Sen. Obama in such large numbers because he is black. Did it ever occur to some of you racists that AA's are voting for Sen. Obama BECAUSE HE HAS INNOVATIVE IDEAS that will help the country??? Could it be because he has integrity and is honest??? Could it be because Sen. Clinton is corrupt and froth with scandal??? Here's a surprise for you... African American's do have BRAINS, and have the ability to decipher intellectually the same as anyone else. AA's have voted for whites for many, many years, so to conclude that they are voting for Sen. Obama merely because he is black is offensive, and shows just how racist you are to make such an outlandish statement.

OBAMA, 2008!

KJ, Dallas, TX (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:32 AM)

Does the Clinton campaign realize they can not argue that all states must count and also argue that the popular vote is the deciding factor?

Using the popular vote as the deciding factor, is the equivalent of saying the 14 states who held caucuses do not count.

Why won't Hillary agree that the caucus states must be counted equally?

Dan (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:25 AM)
**************************************************

Dan makes a great point.

Also, at this juncture, it really doesn't matter. Right? Even with all of the delegates from MI & FL seated, Obama will still get the nomination. It's time to start thinking toward the general election and beating John McCain.

http://thepajamapundit.com/

the Pajama Pundit (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:32 AM)

An even split is fair for both Fl and MI. It's all about bragging rights.

Tania, Winter Haven, FL (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:32 AM)

There is no way that Spanish and mostly catholic will vote for Obama! Hasta la vista Democrats, Bienvenido McCay.

Ava,Memphis (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:39 AM)

Something needs to be done to Mich & Florida besides seating seating them now because they won't pick the nominee. They broke the rules and flaunted the fact that they were to important not to seat. If they get fully seated then the DNC approves of what they did.
Not getting to see Hillary campaign shouldn't be considered a punishment...I would think of it as a blessing. You have 48 states that followed the rules and unless you want more of this in the future they will not let them have their way.

OhioWantsRevote (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:44 AM)

Hey Hillary, You will never be President! If you steal this nomination, people will stay home on election day. You are unelectable with a 54% negative rating. Go away!!!

Disgusted, NYC (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:46 AM)

what is the big deal about fl and mi - let them get seated and obama wins. what they should do is have supers endorse obama and then seat them as is.

why is the media being stirred the by hrc campaign so easily!

nolawi (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:47 AM)

Mr. Chuck Todd:

With these many scenarios in mind, how would the popular vote and delegate counts look if any of the above scenarios were played out?

Joe - STL (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:48 AM)

AS Howard Dean said...after June 3rd this will be (Fl. and MI. question) resolved...have a little faith in the party leader..?

BJ, CA (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:49 AM)

Florida and Michigan have only themselves to blame. They are like little brats running around and being disrespectful of any rules and then demanding their own way. If I were their "Mama Dean" I would tell them them "NO" and to be quiet!

Obama is the Nominee (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:52 AM)

"The Clinton campaign wants the primary results to be used to determine how the pledged delegates are allocated, a move that could cut Sen. Obama's lead by 40 or 50 votes, by some calculations."
***************************

More hypocrisy from the Queen of Double Speak. Just a few weeks ago, she was reminding us all how "pledged delegates can actually vote however they want, they don't have to vote their constituency." I cannot believe how unabashedly she lies, cheats, and manipulates to get what she wants. And all she wants is power - this has nothing to do with helping the American people. That is NOT what I want in a president.

Linda. Boston, MA (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:53 AM)

Eventhough I support Senator Obama, I think that they should seat the delegates. Give each candidate the votes and delegates that they received in the Florida primary. The new proposal that the Michigan delegation is proposing is fair. I say accept it and let's move on. Even with these two states being added Senator Clinton still will not have enough delegates to win the nomination. Come on people let's end this thing already.

Michelle, Baltimore (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:53 AM)

Sen. Tracy Potter, Bismarck --> That sounds elitist. We're not the top-down party ... or are we? <--

Democrat leaders never trust the voter. Hence the concept of the "super delegate". This is why it is so important to the Democrats that they get liberal judges appointed to all of the courts. That way the judges can impose the minority position on the majority.

Alan Hill, Normal OK (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:54 AM)

I think the undeclared super delegates are COWARDS, kinda reminds of the lack of backbone they display in the congress. This race is OVER yet they remain on the fence. I think it is very disingenuous for them not to flock to Obama, since this thing is OVER. They suggest that some unforeseen bomb may fall on Obama making him unelectable. Why don’t they just be honest and say they don’t want to elect the black man. I’m sure if the shoe were on the other foot they would have declared Clinton the winner along time ago. The undeclared supers are quickly becoming the embarrassment of the Democratic Party.

Tammy Wiggins, Liberty Hill, Texas (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:55 AM)

I completly disagree with usurping the rules in the middle of a contest. There is no moral precedence in it.

It does not bode well for trust in a Clinton Presidency.

The DNC must assert it's authority now, if they expect to be respected in the future.

It has occured to me why we need the primaries to be held in a controlled sequence. The candiates would never be able to wage a coherent, effective campaign otherwise. They would have to compete in too many states, jumping the gun to be among the first to vote.

ernie (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:56 AM)

THis is crazy.
The people responsable for michigan not being counted are the super delegates. how bout we seat the elected delagets but not the supers from michigan. also do not allow them into the venue.

I really dont care if Debbie Dingbat Dingle and Jenifer Granmole Granholm get to go to a party in denver.

Count the votes of the people.

I wonder if Debbie Stabenaaw would win this year if she was on the schedule for senete election
I doubt it

GDI in Michigan (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:58 AM)

Has anyone seen the George Will article on the changing metrics this morning (not sure if it was mentioned above as I read backward)...well, let's just say he "went there". Click to see what I mean, I'm talking about the part that talks about language in the US Constitution. An excellent observation he makes.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/looking_for_a_metric.html

Some might say that it cheapens this race, this nomination, to constantly talk about changing the metrics. Some might say that it undermines the eventual nominee. And its not only Clinton doing it, everyday this goes on, the DNC and the Democratic Party Leadership in complicit in this "deception". That's a shame.

Everytime we talk about MI and FL, all I think is that this should have been decided before the race began, and that's pretty much all I think about it.

Lisa, New Britain, CT...CT for Obama (continuing my ABCs for my own amusement!) (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:00 AM)

First, Ickles voted to strip the delegates of MI and FL. Clinton agreed to that proposal and stated this past February or March that MI did not count. Why are they making an argument that they do count? Blame it on the state representatives who moved up the primary knowing the consequences. Grow up and follow the rules. Second, why count the votes in MI and FL if Clinton wants the will of the people to be overturned by the superdelegates? I am confused with this contradiction.

voter (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:01 AM)

it is not fair that barrack obama get any delegates from mi. his name was not on the ballot there and he should not get any of the delegates, some should be allocated to mrs. clinton, maybe not all of them but obama should get none. B.G. in L.V.

Bonnie George las vegas, nv. (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:02 AM)

Most reasonable people understand that the "contests" in FL and MI were tainted from the get-go and should not stand as is. If some reasonable compromise can be worked out, great, but I have not seen anything resembling reasonableness from the Clinton camp, especially Wolfson and McCauliffe. What is truly amazing is that these people get so much air time ranting absurdities as though if repeated loudly and often enough gives them credibility - and the media keep looping the same crapola over and over because it's sensational. It's called "INTEGRITY" folks - get some! Brass and gold look very much alike under bright lights, and the Clintons have fooled about 49% of the people, but NOT a majority.

Jack Hussein Donovan (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:03 AM)

So has Hillary resulted to trying to argue her electability on race? She is going to try to divide the country racially...just to make a point and try to get the SD to pick her. IS that what we really need, pluse no one believe that anyway, except her. There are millions of Americas of all colors...that support Barack not just the "working white class" as the Media and Hillary seem to be focusing on. This is a disgrace.....People want change..Just for the record can someone tell me what you guys call the Blacks that vote for Hillary? What class do you put them in...or do they not matter because there's not as many of them?

Media-Blues,PA (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:04 AM)

CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK
CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK, CLUCK

Panic makes A-Foul (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:08 AM)

-
THE RULES COMMITTEE IS 'FIXED' --- That's why Hillary is staying in the race ---- THE FIX IS IN FOR HER.

THERE WILL BE HELL TO PAY.

.....................................................

DNC: THE RULES COMMITTEE IS 'FIXED' --- (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:08 AM)

I don't like to see any state disinfranchised. If I were a resident of Florida or Michigan I, too, would be upset about this since the voters didn't make the decision to move their primaries up. The question, which has been posed before in these blogs, is if they do seat the delegates and give the decisions to Hillary Clinton, doesn't this disinfranchise those who stayed home after being told their votes wouldn't count? Either way, someone loses....especially the Deocratic Party. Let Hillary have her votes in Florida since Obama's name was also on the ballot. No way should she declare Michigan, however.

Jo, Chicago (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:08 AM)

Look, a lot of people did not vote because the resutls were not supposed to matter. Should they be disenfranchised?

Der Auf (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:12 AM)

This has been beat to death! Unless Obama's camp agrees to an amicable settlement, it will be left to the so-called rules committee and it sounds like they are making things up as they go along. Those two states screwed the pooch big-time and they should accept it and get over it. They get a shot at redemption with their votes in November. They have had a messed up system for a long time and it's high time they sit down and figure it out before the next big election. They are an embarassment! We need election reform!

Obama O-Eight

StevO, Denver, CO (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:15 AM)

As a Michigan voter, I will be incredibly upset if the state isn't punished in some fashion for proceeding with a plan that never won the approval of a majority of voting Michigan Democrats. Moving up the primary date was the brainchild of the superdelegates, and as such, I would be extremely pleased if, as Tracy suggests above, none of them are seated. However, having voted "Undecided" in our primary (as an Edwards supporter at the time), I would be equally upset if the delegate split is egregiously in Clinton's favor. The state party's apparatus has always been in Clinton's camp, and there's no way to look at her name remaining on the ballot in any other way than an attempt to game the system. That type of behavior should not be rewarded.

Chris, MI (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:15 AM)

democrats act as elitists and who better to represent them than barack hussein obama. they complained that in 2000 every vote wasn't counted in florida b/c it showed gore lost, now no votes will be counted from either florida or michigan. instead nancy pelosi and edward kennedy will play a role as "super delegates" in choosing the nominee. well that isn't elitist is it? who better to help choose the next democratic nominee than those out of touch leftist liberals. who does he make his spirtual advisor in the white house rev. wright? is his wife going to continue to complain how hard working americans have gotten to much of the pie or is she going to realize that we earned our bigger portion through hard work not by book deals like her and her husband! great choice democrats!?!

tony r., lansdale, pa (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:16 AM)

Forget it! Michigan blame lies entirely with Granholm, the two Dingells, Levin and a few others who tried to do an end run and got their hands slapped.

While Florida's a bit different, the same stupidity caught Hastings, Nelson, and others napping, same solution. You blew it and stay home.

If the DNC caves on this, be on the watch for a 2011 Fall Primary. Wouldn't that be "ducky". Here's what to do.

First, sit down with the GOP and agree to the following. NH Primary is the first Tuesday in March, which is Town Meeting Day. Have the Iowa caucus two weeks earlier. Have regional primaries every two weeks after that on a rotating basis for each election cycle. Caucuses in the "regional" calendar slots as well. Last primary is the first Tuesday in May. Oh, and about those "Superdelegates'? Can'em, but stick with proportional delegate allocation (i.e. no winner take all). No one's ecastic, but everyone has a shot at the first regional if it rotates every four years.

We can't put the country through this again.

Joe Mathews, Manchester, VT (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:17 AM)

We will come together, even those who don't want to.

Do you know why?

Because, Obama said to tell the truth.

The truth is we are all part of this great land--no matter our individual opinions and prejudices. Like the man said, "I am imperfect."

But he is right, people, it is not about Obama, Clinton, or MCCAIN.

The real question is do we want to continue the war in IRAQ? With more dead and wounded.

Do we want to reward the rich and pull every spare dime there is out of the poor and middle class? (more Bush)

Do we want health care for all--or should we let, at least some of them, die in the streets?

What do we, the people, want?

Go ahead, you narrow minded individuals, go ahead and jump ship. Cut of your head to cure your headache--yes, that will make you feel better (or bitter) However, in the end you are only acting in a self-destructive way.

Surely, if Hillary had won, I would want her policy--not McCains! It doesn't matter that I find Hillary completely repulsive, and dishonest. Her policies are sound, and they are very close to Obama's, and they well help Americans! And they will help my friends, the soldiers! And they will help us all!
Those Policies will help our education and our economy. Those policies will determine and define all of us.

The rich, are rich for a reason. Special interest lobby for a reason. Politicians accept money from special interests for a reason! Obama's policies, the same in many ways as Clinton's policies, are this contry's great chance to change the course of our dependence on oil, on special interest, and on dirty politics in general. It's time to have a little discipline and not act like a spoiled brat.

It is time to come together as Democrats!

Republicans: Beware!

Andress (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:18 AM)

If the rules committee screws Obama out of his rightful nomination, I'm going Independent. Cant the DNC do ANYTHING right?!?

Class Warrior, D.C. (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:21 AM)

The rules committee of the Democrats just do not get it! You don't barter with the peoples vote Democrats! The simple right of people to vote should not be replaced with some weird game of 'Deal or No Deal'!

Frustrated Democrat in Michigan (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:23 AM)

Mrs. Clinton can't win the nomination one way or the other and should back off on this subject and stop angering voters that were screwed by their own state party heads, who should be dumped. Don't go down hissing Hillie. It isn't lady like.

bill, okla (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:28 AM)

The delegates must be split 50/50. It should not be assumed that Hillary would have received the majority of the votes if any other candidate had been on the ballot. Tt is not realistic and it would amount to an unearned give away to Hillary.

shirley, san jose, ca (Sent Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:29 AM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

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

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=994654