I think this deserves its own thread. Whatever ends up happening with those two states will determine whether Clinton beats out Obama. I think the only fair thing to do is play by the rules they were given...which is they do not count. Even a revote seems wrong to me. Obviously they aren't going to do what Hillary wants which is to count the old as results as 'official' even though obama wasnt even on one of the tickets and neither campaigned there.

Can we get a poll? What should happen with Florida and Michigan. There are a few options:

Old vote is counted.
New vote is done.
Hold Caucuses.
Michigan and Florida get seated based on the national vote (basically rendering them meaningless).
Old rule stands, they are not given any representation.

Fla. Senator to D.N.C.: Pay for a New Primary
By Kate Phillips

Updated Senator Bill Nelson, Democrat of Florida and supporter of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, today called for the national Democratic party to either seat the delegates from the January contest or pay for another primary to be held in the Sunshine State.
While he has consistently held out for the delegates chosen through the Jan. 29 primary (which Mrs. Clinton won without any campaigning there) to be seated at the Democratic convention in August, it seems as though he’s reacting to the D.N.C.’s intransigence to that prospect.
Remember that Senator Nelson sued the national party in the courts over its decision to strip Florida of all its delegates, and he lost. His statement today lends an additional boost to the sentiments of others, including Senator Clinton and Mr. Nelson’s partner-state-in-crime, Michigan, who want their voters counted. (Senator Clinton won that primary with nearly 50 percent of the vote.) But he’s decidedly against a caucus-type contest.
From his statement:

With two outstanding candidates battling so closely for their party’s nomination, there’s no way you can tell nearly two-million Florida voters they don’t count.”
He would prefer that the vote in January be counted and respected. “Period. Paragraph,” said one of his spokesman.
But he also penned a letter to the D.N.C.’s chairman Howard Dean, with the gist of his argument.
Florida’s 4 million Democrats are at issue here. And while Senator Nelson will not at this point sign on to the logistics of some different options, other than a straight-up vote at the polls situation, let’s talk about them. Mr. Dean earlier today said that the national Democratic party wouldn’t pay for another primary, either in Florida or in Michigan, where the same sanctions have stripped the Democrats of their delegates and superdelegates because these two states held their contests before the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday.
A full-blown Florida do-over primary could cost upwards of $15 million. (That’s what it cost to do the Republican and Democratic primary in January.)
“He just sees it as an important issue — one person, one vote,” said Mr. Nelson’s spokesman, Dan McLaughlin late today. He added, “Senator Nelson has steadfastly held to the belief that Dean acted arbitrarily and harshly,” in denying the voices of Florida voters, who went to the polls in record numbers.
Mr. McLaughlin said: “Howard Dean made this mess. He imposed an unusually harsh penalty. … He has to fix it.'’
And while Gov. Charlie Crist has been all over the airwaves appealing for Florida’s voters to be counted, the senator’s office basically says, well, that’s a moot point for Republicans. They have their nominee, in Senator John McCain, (who surpassed the delegate-hurdle on Tuesday night and is the presumptive nominee).
What are the options. Well, one could look at Oregon’s way — mail-in ballots — and wonder if that would work in Florida. Senator Nelson hasn’t signed onto that, but there are estimates out there that in the sunny southern state, such a contest would cost only $4 million, not four or five times that, as a do-over.
And, there’s another interesting twist. Should Florida hold a late-late do-over, some people are reading the national party’s bylaws to suggest that the state’s influence could increase greatly. In fact, a late primary/contest could give the state a 15-to-30-percent delegate boost over its already significant slate of 120 pledged delegates. That could add 51 more delegates to Florida’s sway.
[Update, 6:30 p.m. In an interview with U.S. News & World Report, Senator Clinton had this to say about the process going forward:
I would not accept a caucus. I think that would be a great disservice to the 2 million people who turned out and voted. I think that they want their votes counted. And you know a lot of people would be disenfranchised because of the timing and whatever the particular rules were. This is really going to be a serious challenge for the Democratic Party because the voters in Michigan and Florida are the ones being hurt, and certainly with respect to Florida the Democrats were dragged into doing what they did by a Republican governor and a Republican Legislature. They didn’t have any choice whatsoever. And I don’t think that there should be any do-over or any kind of a second run in Florida. I think Florida should be seated.]
And from Michigan: The state’s Democratic chairman Mark Brewer issued this statement: “We are currently in negotiations over the seating of a Michigan delegation to the National Convention. Any resolution must be agreeable to all four interested parties: the M.D.P., the D.N.C., and both the Clinton and Obama campaigns because we all want a united Democratic Party in Michigan to ensure a victory for the Democratic nominee this fall. A McCain presidency would continue the failed policies of the Bush Administration that hurt Michigan jobs, keep health care out of reach for millions, and make our country less safe. I am confident that we will reach a compromise that will result in Michigan being a full participant at the national convention.”
We don’t know yet how this will all end. We’re assessing it, just like everyone else, as we go along. But there’s no question that the interested parties — the invested voices — want all votes counted. Somehow, someday.
As we said earlier, the big issue is who pays? Will the Democratic campaigns pony up some money along with the national party so that these big states aren’t, as some suggest, disenfranchised?
Earlier today, we asked our readers for their opinions on what to do about Michigan and Florida. And we’d like to carry that debate over in this most recent post, so please carry on the conversation here, too. We’ll report back on the most interesting, thoughtful possibilities going forward.

The answer is they need to vote again. The problem with that will be in Fla where the Republican Governor and Legislator will not be willing to fund a new vote.

i think some rich democrat can come up with the money to fund the vote...Soros or someone. there is no shortage of money out there.

As stupid as the rule is, they knew they were breaking it. First of all, the votes shouldn't stand, because that wouldn't be a fair campaign; and second, taxpayers shouldn't fund another vote. But, like you said, if some rich democrat comes forward and offers to sponsor it, more power to them.

I think the the votes should't count and there shouldn't be a do-over. You don't change the rules in the middle of the game. If Florida democrats feel disenfranchised they should vote out the state legislature or change their party affiliation.

This doesn't address the current situation, but in 2012 I think every state not named Iowa should move up their primaries. That'd be a load of fun.

It would not be bending the rules for MI and FL to have a revote or some other delegate selection process, as long as it takes places after Feb 5. I support a revote because I think that the people did get screwed by their legislators and don't deserve to have no voice. But the current results are bullshit. Hillary was the only one (besides Kucinich) on the ballot in Michigan (a decision as craven as her Iraq War vote, IMO), and nobody campaigned in Florida.

I think a revote will help Obama, but only marginally. The real issue is that it's too important for the Party to have Michigan and Florida represented at teh convention, but its also equally important to not allow blatant rule-breakers to stand.

What I think might end up happening if there's no revote, is that Obama will just allow the January votes to stand if he is up by enough in the pledged delegate count, and they let him have all of the "uncommitted" delegates from Michigan. Then he looks magnanimous and he still wins the nomination even WITH Hillary's cheating.

Someone actually thinks the old votes should stand with Obama not even on one of the tickets

I'm sure it was just LW.

Under that scenario (and depending on what happens with the rest of the primaries), Obama would hold onto his pledged delegate count but would likely lose the popular vote....in which case he is screwed.

Right now, if we count Michigan and Florida as is, Obama is behind in the popular vote count:

Obama:
13,575,302

Clinton:
13,609,945

Without Florida and Michigan, he is up almost 600,000 votes.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... count.html

So a revote in both states, if it happens, should be established where Obama can spend a few weeks letting the people get to know him and hope that he can keep the margins close, as I don't think he can win either contest.
But the bottom line is that popular vote count. The candidate with the popular vote lead at the end of the process will have the winning argument.

Disagree. If he's up by a big margin, and he allows the MI & FL delegates to be seated, nobody's gonna give two shits about the popular vote, which is utterly irrelevant anyway. IMO, the only things that are important are pledged delegates, and who is polling better against McCain in a state by state poll like the SUSA one from today. That's it. Hillary is only trying to sell this popular vote shit because it's all she's got, and it ain't even shit because...


Those numbers don't reflect the voters in CAUCUS STATES. I haven't checked to see if they even counted them in this tally, but even if they did, caucuses have much lower turnout than primaries (for both candidates), and are not reflective of the number of popular votes the candidates would receive in a general election or primary in the same state.


Don't buy the Clinton bullshit. Popular vote means nothing when you're choosing delegates in a caucus.

Fair points all around...I didn't realize that the website didn't count the caucus popular voting.

That said, what sticks in my mind is the, let's say, "Gore argument." What if Obama is leading at the end of all of this with pledged delegates but Clinton has pulled ahead in the popular vote count....say by 100K. Wouldn't it be realistic for Clinton (and if the situation was reversed, Obama) to say, "My, this is just like the 2000 election where Gore won the popular vote but lost with that wacky electoral college (substitute proportional delegate system)." That is what I think would be the argument to the superdelegates in terms of honoring the will of the people.

Now don't get me wrong....I know the Clintons have made every argument possible.....the caucuses don't count, the red states don't count, blah blah. I'm just thinking of how all this goes down with this asinine superdelegate crap. And I agree that electability (polls that would trend towards Obama) should weigh heavily with the final decision as well.
I am starting to get this sinking feeling that the Clintons are going to successfully build up Hillary to be the "safe choice" and the superdelegates will fall in line out of fear of losing the election (regardless of Hillary's constant high negatives and her old-school approach of focusing on 'X' states plus one to win the general).

For what it's worth, after Hillary's "John McCain and I have crossed the Commander-In-Chief threshold, while our opponent has not" horseshit, my wife and I made another donation to Obama.

DailyKos is a lousy barometer of feelings in the Democratic Party recently, since it's become Obama central (check out mydd.com for the Clinton side of things), but I'm getting the feeling that the "McCain is better than Obama" tactic is what is going to ultimately sink Clinton, and if she sticks with it, quickly. I mean, if Obama were in her position and were pulling something similar, I think the Clintons would have him killed, literally. I think that some Democratic Party power brokers are going to be either quietly telling Clinton to STFU on this line, or they are going to loudly endorse Obama to stop it before it does serious damage to the Party.

Fuck Florida and Michigan. They were told they'd lose their delegates. They took that bet. They lost.

You have to follow through with punishment when you're working with children.

Those "children" represent 44 electoral votes in the November election. Don't beat them to death, dad.

I bet Florida goes to McCain anyhow, and if Michigan really wants to vote McCain, I think it's worth 4 years of his presidency just to watch Michigan go even further to shit.

I know I'm not being a realist, but some part of you surely feels the same way.

hahahahhahaha

Sorry, I'm not a stupid Big Ten football fan. I'll keep thinking about my kids' futures.

A Large part of me feels the same way.