FL and MI

[© tweed]

what will happen?

[Speed of Sound]

Theyre getting nothin. They cant satisfy Clinton voters with a re-vote (Obama would close the gap and lower their delegate count considerably), they cant satisfy Obama voters with a handover of delegates, and either one would still give the Reps ammunition in November. When you have the decision to do something and have everyone hate you and do nohting and have everyone hate you, ALWAYS DO NOTHING. Its a social law.

[TomC]

If it's clear they won't change the outcome, they will indeed get seated. I think that's likely to happen.

[Mr. Morden]

This doesn't really capture the full spectrum of possibilities.  There's an excellent chance that the nomination will be resolved before the convention w/o FL & MI, and the loser releases his/her delegates, and the winner accepts the FL/MI delegates, but they don't change the outcome.  Also, by all indications, the DNC is already urging them to hold new contests, but the FL/MI Democratic parties aren't interested.

[J. J.]

I've posted this before:

1.  Assuming that the DNC had the authority to set the rule (I have not checked), FL and MI delegates should not be seated under the current rules, procedurally.

2.  It is possible for the DNC to rescind or use the motion amend something previously adopted the rule and then ratify the delegate selection, procedurally.   (See Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 10th edition, 2000, pp. 119, p. 293 ff. It is the one the DNC uses and it is not online.) 

3.  The credentials committee can also attempt to resolve this, right before the convention (Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, pp. 595-6).

Option #2 has the effect of unleashing a whole bunch of Clinton delegates on the Convention, but it could be done within the rules, unless they actually put that in the bylaws (and I don't think they did).  However, politically, Clinton can say, "Hey, we're letting the voters decided this through there directly elected representatives." She can say this in the case where she has a majority of the delegates, but a minority of the pledged delegates, without FL and MI.

Option #1 has the effect of restraining a whole bunch of Clinton delegates from voting.  Obama can say, "We are playing by the rules as they were adopted."  The problem here is that the rules, as they were adopted, say that those super delegates get to vote on the nomination.  You can't complain about the super delegates without looking like a complete hypocrite, which you really don't want to do if you're running for President.

So basically, for Obama to win this issue, he has to either have enough delegates, including super delegates, to win even if FL and MI are in (#1) or Obama has to have elected delegates, including MI and FL, but excluding the super delegates.

Option #3 depends on the makeup of the credentials committee, and could lead to a floor fight. (Think a Convention similar to 1968.)

There is a fourth option, to hold a primary or caucus in FL and MI.  That is expensive and the state parties can't afford it; so unless the DNC steps in with a couple of checks, it won't happen and the time frame is rapidly running out.

Expect for #4, I don't see how this can do anything but hurt Obama, politically.  He'll either have to face a potential loss at the hands of the super delegates or permit the elected delegates, including MI and FL, to vote, or prepare for a floor fight (which could be reminiscent of 1968).

Nasty, but I see a built in advantage for Clinton.  Now, basically if Obama can get a majority of delegates overall, without MI and FL, he's home free.

[© tweed]

This doesn't really capture the full spectrum of possibilities.  There's an excellent chance that the nomination will be resolved before the convention w/o FL & MI, and the loser releases his/her delegates, and the winner accepts the FL/MI delegates, but they don't change the outcome.  Also, by all indications, the DNC is already urging them to hold new contests, but the FL/MI Democratic parties aren't interested.

that would fit into category of seated delegates

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Hillary ran a race in MI and was the only person on the ballot.

They could get away with seating FL.

MI ; no way.

It will go to court and be a public firestorm to award Hillary the nomination without even having Obama on the ballot.

The party that screamed about 2000 is going to seat delegates in a trumped up election with only her on the ballot.

Go ahead Hillary and team do it.   I dare you to try to spin your way of this crap

[perdedor]

Hopefully, they walk away with absolutely nothing. The DNC's rules were very clear and the state parties of Florida and Michigan broke them. Their wishes regarding this election cycle should be the least of the DNC's concerns at this point.

[TomC]

Hopefully, they walk away with absolutely nothing. The DNC's rules were very clear and the state parties of Florida and Michigan broke them. Their wishes regarding this election cycle should be the least of the DNC's concerns at this point.

Maybe, but 44 electors could most certainly decide the general, so it should be a concern. Don't get me wrong, I don't want them to decide the nomination, but on the other hand, I don't want the voters to be pissed.

[exopolitician]

FL & MI delegates that are seated wont matter much anyways, so I dont care what happens now with this situation.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Hopefully, they walk away with absolutely nothing. The DNC's rules were very clear and the state parties of Florida and Michigan broke them. Their wishes regarding this election cycle should be the least of the DNC's concerns at this point.

Maybe, but 44 electors could most certainly decide the general, so it should be a concern. Don't get me wrong, I don't want them to decide the nomination, but on the other hand, I don't want the voters to be pissed.

Hold it again !!!   Costs too much?  Good for them.  The price for breaking the rules and perfect justice.  That way the voters don't get pissed but the party pays for their  arrogant attitude

[Mr. Morden]

Btw, Carl Levin and Bill Nelson are decidedly against a revote:

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2008/02/13/levin-and-nelson-no-revotes.aspx

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I just have a hard time believing that the state party in either state is going to hold a revote of any kind.  They'll just keep demanding that the existing slate of delegates is the legitimate slate, even if they end up losing, and don't get any representation at the convention.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Levin, Hillary and the Clinton hacks are disgusting.

Blame Obama for following the rules and take no responsibility for your actions to change them after the fact.

Yes, it's Obama's fault for not being a political dirt bags like you are.

Be proud of yourselves for acting like slime but remember it's all Obama's fault

[Torie]

The answer of course is that it depends upon the circumstances. Who knew?  But it won't happen if that makes the critical difference in putting Clinton over the top. The Supers are not going to let that happen.

[Gabu]

Under section 37(b) of the contract signed by them, it states quite clearly that all offers shall become null and void if - and you can read it for yourself in this photostatic copy - "I, the undersigned, shall forfeit all rights, privileges, and licenses herein and herein contained," et cetera, et cetera, "fax mentis incendium gloria cultum," et cetera, et cetera, "memo bis punitor delicatum!"  It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal!  You moved your primaries beyond February 5!  You bumped into our earlier states, so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

"It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal! You moved your primaries beyond February 5! You bumped into our earlier states, so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!"

Amen...does that mean Levin and HRC cannot read or are too damn arrogant to care?

[Mr. Morden]

Amen...does that mean Levin and HRC cannot read or are too damn arrogant to care?

Obviously HRC can read, since, back in October, she defended her decision to leave her name on the ballot in MI in the face of criticism from NH Dems, saying that the election wasn't going to count anyway:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101100859.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[J. J.]

Levin, Hillary and the Clinton hacks are disgusting.

Blame Obama for following the rules and take no responsibility for your actions to change them after the fact.

Yes, it's Obama's fault for not being a political dirt bags like you are.

Be proud of yourselves for acting like slime but remember it's all Obama's fault

Rules can be rescinded, amended, and even suspended (though probably not in this case), or past actions ratified, if the votes are there.  They are not carved in stone.  The same rules that say MI and FL delegates don't get seated are the very same ones that say Super Delegates can take this away from the elected delegates.

You may not like it, but it can happen.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Levin, Hillary and the Clinton hacks are disgusting.

Blame Obama for following the rules and take no responsibility for your actions to change them after the fact.

Yes, it's Obama's fault for not being a political dirt bags like you are.

Be proud of yourselves for acting like slime but remember it's all Obama's fault

Rules can be rescinded, amended, and even suspended (though probably not in this case), or past actions ratified, if the votes are there.  They are not carved in stone.  The same rules that say MI and FL delegates don't get seated are the very same ones that say Super Delegates can take this away from the elected delegates.

You may not like it, but it can happen.

Believe me, I understand what they have the legal rights to do.  That's not an issue.

The question here is does Hillary understand?  The answer is that ready from Day one has experience but NO judgment.  This will create a FIRESTORM that will literally destroy the party and convention.  The people loading the fuel will be the republicans using the news media to fire up Obama supporters.  Hillary may have been around for years and have "experience" but she is an absolute moron and she has no judgment whatsoever.  Obama is right about judgment.  Dingbat Hillary is proving it to the world with this attempted stunt

[cannonia]

Believe me, I understand what they have the legal rights to do.  That's not an issue.

The question here is does Hillary understand?  The answer is that ready from Day one has experience but NO judgment.  This will create a FIRESTORM that will literally destroy the party and convention.  The people loading the fuel will be the republicans using the news media to fire up Obama supporters.  Hillary may have been around for years and have "experience" but she is an absolute moron and she has no judgment whatsoever.  Obama is right about judgment.  Dingbat Hillary is proving it to the world with this attempted stunt

I'm more cynical about the Clintons.  Ever since I heard that she was on the ballot in Michigan and that she was making "fund-raising" appearances in Florida, I've believed she was looking for a way to pick up some free delegates and get them seated at the convention, rules or no rules.

[Trilobyte]

It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal!  You moved your primaries beyond February 5!  You bumped into our earlier states, so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!

It's not that simple. If the DNC enforces the rules exactly as they are written, then IA, NH and SC would also lose their delegates since they also moved their voting dates.

[Angel of Death]

Am I the only person to think you should have phrased the third option as "they leave with nothing" the Weakest Link style?

[Lief 🗽]

Gabu is my hero.

[they don't love you like i love you]

It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal!  You moved your primaries beyond February 5!  You bumped into our earlier states, so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!

It's not that simple. If the DNC enforces the rules exactly as they are written, then IA, NH and SC would also lose their delegates since they also moved their voting dates.

DNC rules carves out exemptions for those states, and Iowa also has the "caucus loophole" in its defense (they didn't really select their national delegates then.) This is what got Iowa and Nevada off the hook on the GOP side.

I predict that in the end the state parties will keep refusing a revote, but the DNC will eventually offer to pay for it, and it'll happen.

[Angel of Death]

Amen...does that mean Levin and HRC cannot read or are too damn arrogant to care?

Obviously HRC can read, since, back in October, she defended her decision to leave her name on the ballot in MI in the face of criticism from NH Dems, saying that the election wasn't going to count anyway:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101100859.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is so Hillary; she triangulates and then tries to give a tortured explanation for her decision nobody can figure out. How does having her name on or off the ballot affect any "damage"?