Michigan and Florida voters participated in "events," not primaries
As secretary of the Democratic National Committee, Alice Travis Germond will call the roll of states later this year when the party nominates its presidential ticket at its convention in Denver. She took note of that today as a member of the party rules committee that met in Washington to try to figure out if -- and to what degree -- the Michigan and Florida delegations would be part of that confab.
Germond noted early during the panel's deliberations that in her secretary's role, she looked forward to including the two states as she works her way through the roll call. But she was very careful with her language in discussing the dispute over the nomination contests that Michigan and Florida conducted in violation of DNC rules.
Germond -- for many years a key behind-the-scenes player in California's Democratic Party before she moved East -- seemed loath to use the term "primary."
Her favored term for the votes: "events" (which drew a chuckle from the committee's audience the first time she used it).
No doubt such attention to detail is crucial to her job, which includes certifying all convention delegates and vote counts.
-- Don Frederick
Two very big problems with Hillary's arguments that she is winning the popular vote.
1) The democratic nomination process is NOT based on the popular vote. It has been based on state delegates for decades. If you want to change this rule you needed to do that before the nomination process started not at the end when you realized you were losing.
It is like saying after you lost a football game by 21-17 that you decide arbitrarily to say that a touchdown no longer counts for 6 points but rather 4 points. How does anyone actually think that would be fair??
2) Second point is if you even had an argument for the popular vote case you are not counting all the votes in the caucus states as they don't record popular vote. So now you are disenfranchising all the caucus states. But apparently Hillary doesn't care about them because that would not help her losing case.
Posted by: E Nelson | May 31, 2008 at 03:54 PM
Democrats are screwed in November. Florida and Michigan will cross vote for McCain. As such All Hillary supporters are unhappy and dislike BHO. So, We can assure another term for Republicans :). Now BHO's paid bloggers will jump up and down on comments but fools does not understand that this would not help in November as well. BHO is a lost ticket.. :) good luck folks
Posted by: jon | May 31, 2008 at 04:23 PM
Hillary's supporters tried to outscream democracy. It was a true reflection of their candidate. How embarrassing.
Posted by: Ericmiami | May 31, 2008 at 04:28 PM
At the beginning of this campaign, I was open to the possibility of voting for Hillary Clinton. Now I'm trying to figure out why she has any support left at all.
We have just suffered through nearly 8 years of the most malignant and dishonest Presidency in the history of this country (speaking as a Republican who voted for Bush in 2000). Why would we consider electing yet another narcissistic, megalomaniac (perhaps even worse in that regard than Bush) who has demonstrated her utter disregard for ethics, rules, her word given (along with her signature), and coincidentally the best interests of her own party. Putting aside the sick psycho-pathology she revealed by numerous gratuitous references to the Bobby Kennedy assassination, can any Clinton supporter imagine the consequences of awarding the nomination to Hillary Clinton under any formula you might name involving states where both candidates voluntarily stipulated that those contests would not count?
Senator Clinton has reminded the entire country of her dexterity with her word, her promises and the truth. What makes her supporters so confident that she will do any of the things she has said she would do, starting with Iraq? She said she'd begin withdrawing the first of our troops within 60-days. Anyone care to guess how when the last ones will actually leave? The size of that loophole should give you an idea of who you're dealing with.
Posted by: ted in pdx | May 31, 2008 at 04:30 PM
Why can't these people just stop cheating and have a normal election?
Both these states are a joke.
I think they just want people to get discouraged and not vote.
Posted by: democracy dead | May 31, 2008 at 04:30 PM
Everybody was using the term "event(s)". So, what is your point?
Posted by: SomeoneInIowa | May 31, 2008 at 04:33 PM
Obama just quite his church.
Can he fit anyone else under the bus ???
I doubt it.
Rezko, grandma, Rev Wright.
HIJACKING was the perfect word for what happened today.
People in Florida and Michigan have only have a vote - half a vote. Obama controls the whole thing via the hostage holding of black votes.
OBAMA IS THE DIVIDE and CONQUER MASTER
IT'S THE GAME HE PLAYED IN CHICAGO
HE IS NO UNITER
FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN CAN HAVE THEIR FULL VOTE AND VOICES HEARD IN NOVEMBER
JOHN McCAIN
Posted by: Todd | May 31, 2008 at 04:35 PM
As a centrist/leftist Republican, I have followed this spirited campaign with no little interest. My feelings are summed up this way: Obama pled for a platform that unites the country. Clinton pled for a platform that unites the Democratic Party.
That difference pretty well sums it all for me. All power to Obama.
Posted by: David H. Wallace | May 31, 2008 at 04:37 PM
This is truly a disgrace. Rules are set, and they cannot be broken. Punishments for breaking these rules are stipulated when the rules are established. Once the rules are broken, you cannot go back and say: "well, it's a close race, it wont really affect the outcome, the poor people are disenfranchised," and so on. The local party officials in Michigan and Florida violated the rules set forth by the DNC. The votes should not be considered at all, especially considering that forty-eight other states and several territories were able to follow the rules to the letter. It could be argued that these votes do not alter the outcome of this election; Obama is too far in the lead. This may be true this time, however, the precedent has just been established that you can break any rule that governs how primaries are conducted, just as long as you can find a way to hide behind voter's rights. Hillary should do the right thing and reject the corrupted votes (and endorse Obama, lol)
Posted by: Kenny B. | May 31, 2008 at 04:42 PM
Good for Germond! Maybe if we hadn't spent four months listening to everyone say Clinton "won" the "primaries" in Michigan and Florida, but they weren't counted because of some silly rule, we wouldn't have the emotional mess we now have on our hands.
Clinton has misled her supporters into believing that something has been taken away from them. Even most Obama supporters talk only about following rules but not about the purpose of the rule that Michigan and Florida broke and the effect of breaking that rule on the results of the unauthorized January contests. Clinton benefited from the timing of those contests, not because she was a better candidate, but because more voters had heard of her at the beginning of this process.
Is that the best criterion for selecting a Democratic presidential nominee? Quick, let's get these primaries over with before the other candidates (who weren't already rich and/or famous) get a chance to raise any funds or let anyone know who they are?
Posted by: DoTheMath | May 31, 2008 at 04:45 PM
Well here we go again our gov't at work. first florida and michigan, and now!! they over ride the people of cal. when are we going to wake-up and see what is going on around us it makes me sick to think our gov't has gotten so spinless. We as voters at any time can can get our voting right's stripped from us, and we wonder why there is so much anarchy in the united states. to hell with all the rich trying to get more. put a poor person in charge of the country they know how to make a buck go farther not faster.millions of dollars waisted on a election and for what to see who has the biggest set of ball's. and on a ending note if it is ok for same sex marrage and it's legal then all of us men and women shoud stand up and say it's all right for more than one wife or husband because if you don't you are violating my right's as a U.S. citizen and if this same sex thing is not done away with we as voters must sue there ass back to the stone age where they belong.
Posted by: dewey tomblin hurricane wv. | May 31, 2008 at 04:48 PM
Barack Obama will take a victory lap and be the nominee on Tuesday night in St Paul Minnesota. Go Barack Go.
Ding dong the witch is dead the wicked witch is dead.
United they will come out and move to victory in November.
Posted by: Joe Bento | May 31, 2008 at 04:54 PM
I can't read between the lines, do the votes count or not??
Posted by: G Lyon | May 31, 2008 at 04:55 PM
What is happening to America?
I sometimes think the United States as we know it will not last another 50 or 100 years. This country is TOO screwed up... past the point of no return.
Posted by: Pine 4 Canada | May 31, 2008 at 04:58 PM
What happened to "count every vote" Dean should change his name to George Wallace ... what's next pole taxes and literacy test... in 2000 the wanted to count "hanging chads" now they disenfranchising Florida and Mich. Democratic voters in the two largest electorial states.. have your fun I'll hold my nose and vote Mccain...
Posted by: Chuck Rogers | May 31, 2008 at 05:18 PM
MARK MY WORDS...!
Our economy is really going to to be on the dung pile, if Senator Obama wins? He directly told the general public that he becomes president, he will sign into law a new AMNESTY. Although none of the Presidential contenders can be really trusted, Obama will be true to his word. That means if Democrats don't get to gut the border fence, as they are right now? The raw truth is it will not matter? As taxpayers will be forced by federal law to support the 15 to 38 million illegal immigrants already here. That means big business has won and they just collect the profits.
While the man or women in the street will have a giant financial yoke around their neck, to pay billions in even more welfare programs. Senator Obama will have condemned America to a bleak future, for not only subsidizing millions of poor, non-English speaking, uneducated foreign nationals. Our government skims quietly of your wage packet 356 billion dollars, to support illegal low income workers annually and appease big business and that cost will become a pittance.
The compounding effect is millions of more itinerant labor and families, will breach the border and no patrol, or army will be able to stop the momentum. Thats why we must stop OBAMA with the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088) Tell your Democratic representative to sponsor it now. January 2009 will be far too late!
Posted by: Brittanicus | May 31, 2008 at 05:26 PM
Both Florida and Michigan should be ashamed of themselves for creating this situation. I guess I still "don't belong to an organized party" (WillRogers), even though Doward Dean's 50-state program has been great!. There were good reasons for the rule on dates.
Is Michigan a winner take all state --I hope not. It sems to me that, at most, Hillary should get 60% of the Michigan delegates, divided by two. Even that seems unfair, with Obama's name not on the ballot.
Posted by: Arthur Halenbeck | May 31, 2008 at 05:26 PM
I simply don't get it. The rules are the rules. Is it that the Clinton camp is suggesting that the rules are not ethical and should, therefore, be discarded? If so, why didn't she say so from the start?
Posted by: Seth C | May 31, 2008 at 06:05 PM
Those of you threatening to vote for McCain in November or to not vote at all rather than vote for Obama obviously don't have children. Or, if you do, you apparently don't mind sending them to die in neo-con foreign policy "adventures".
Oh, and don't throw out all the wire coat hangers in your closet. When McCain finishes stacking the Supreme Court, your daughters may need them.
Posted by: bob | May 31, 2008 at 06:06 PM
Todd you must be one of those less than educated Americans with a very narrow view of the real world around you. You need to learn to spell. If you want to have an opinion, I'll give it to you. Obama rocks!!!!!!
Posted by: willie in Kansas | May 31, 2008 at 06:35 PM
I have absolutely no problem with a woman as president of the United States of America. That person however, should not be Shrillary Clinton. Starting in the 1980's, the American economy was hollowed out by successive administrations led by Bush I & II and Bill Clinton. Deregulation of trade and investments, the unexamined possible consequences on NAFTA, a press that was more concerned with ratings and the bottom line than incisive objective journalism. The result is a public more concerned with the latest electronic gizmo distraction or celebrity scandal rather than how the country has been led into interminable debt and what can only charitably described as a "health care crisis management system". Nice. How do you thing the good folks on the U.S. Gulf Coast feel every time they see another wheelbarrow load of dollars being shoveled into the KBR vaults via Irag?
The country is in dire need of serious change. It isn't going to arrive via the semi senile McCain (Bush III) or the Clintons; both of whom are serial liars. If January to June has shown us anything it is this: the Clintons and their minions are more than willing to take down the Democratic party to achieve the ends. If the unthinkable happens in November we'll have no shortage of opportunity to remind them of their unbridled selfishness.
Posted by: Wills46er | May 31, 2008 at 08:14 PM
the more i think about it, the sadder i get. this campaign started out as a race between a no-nonsense war veteran who would trim the fat off the budget by way of earmarks and pork, a woman who embodied everything good about the ninety's prosperity, and the first black man to be politically viable with a message of hope, unity, and a better future. now we're picking between bush III, a ruthlessly competitive witch, and a radical whose friends with a weatherman and a preach who thinks the government is responsible for aids. god bless this political system of ours. some may call it vetting, but i call it depressing. after this process is over, we'll end up with the notion that we're picking the lesser of three evils. the end result: we wont. we'll just stay at home and let the nutjobs on the extreme ends of the political spectrum pick for us, because mainstream America will not vote for any evil.
Posted by: Kenny B. (again) | May 31, 2008 at 09:45 PM
DO NOT be too hasty in declaring victory for Obama.
There are going to be new revelations about him and Michelle in the coming weeks... yesterday's Pfleger outrage is just the beginning!
THIS is WHY he had to quit the church today. There are rumors circulating about videos of Michelle Obama screaming "whitey".
SO be GRATEFUL that Hillary does not give up! Otherwise, you MAY be left with NO presidential candidate in November if you rely solely on this man Barack!
Posted by: Justice | May 31, 2008 at 10:28 PM
For goodness sake. Hillary just got more than what was fair and Ickes has convinced her supporters that she was screwed over. If the delegate vote were meant to proportionally reflect the will of the people, we shouldn't have superdelegates at all and Barack is the winner. Like Bush in Florida before her, Clinton's supporters have insisted that whichever accounting practices serve her best are the only fair method, hoping that noisy outrage will distract enough people from the truth.
Posted by: Matt Wayne | May 31, 2008 at 11:34 PM
Obama is half Kenyan, half American and yet he can run as full candidate for the top job of this country. Schwartzennegger does not have this luxury. How come, people in Michigan and Florida are treated as half? If the rules must maintain integrity, either all votes count or all rejected.
In November, if Obama gets away with this, we will have a choice between McCain and a half creature which deserves only half vote. He has wasted our time talking with rules rather than how to fix our country. He quits his church when, his calculation yields to what he wants. He would accept only to pay his lottery ticket when he is sure to win the prize as he accepts to fully seat Michigan and Florida when only he is the nominee. This guy does not like to take a risk and he wants to be our President.
I will not swallow this.
Posted by: Nt | June 01, 2008 at 09:11 AM
Its getting tiresome hearing the bleating of Obama's Internet sheep telling us that Florida and Michigan must not be counted because those are the rules. The sanction of breaking the party convention date is nowhere in the DNC rules. That's why there was this mess.
So instead of punishing the voters who voted honestly and will rightly feel disenfranchised if their votes do not count like those in other parts of the country, how about some real justice? Allow all the cast votes to stand and kick every one of the Florida and Michigan party representatives involved in selecting the primary date out of the party.
Posted by: Gordon | June 01, 2008 at 07:57 PM
Hmmm... I am a lifelong Florida resident, and I don't recall participating in an "event". I went to the polls to VOTE in the PRIMARY. I have no idea whose idiotic idea it was to hold our primary early, but I would like to tell them what I think about it. But since they are going to count ANY delegate votes, I think they should count the WHOLE vote. Period.
Posted by: SM | June 01, 2008 at 09:00 PM