Clinton Will "Make Sure" Florida's Delegates Get Seated

I suspect the chatter (4.00 / 1)

Josh mentions, with nothing else, is bogus.

There is STRONG reluctance in the courts to overturn party rules.

Freedom to associate, etc.

---

by: elwood @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 20:47:56 PM CST

Yup (4.00 / 1)

Elwood is right; the courts don't override party rules.

Dean, remember that New Hampshire has a history of flouting the rules of both parties.  On the Democratic side, we've succeeded in getting waivers after the SoS has set the date; on the Republican side, the convention just went ahead and voted to seat the delegates.  

Energy and persistence conquer all things.


Benjamin Franklin


 

---

by: Kathy Sullivan @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 20:54:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Good points. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Dean Barker @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:01:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm not so sure about that. (0.00 / 0)

If these were purely caucus results, i agree that there would be little or no chance of court intervention. But in Michigan and Florida these were not party run caucuses (help Dean, Cauci?), but rather state run elections.

When the state runs an election, then state constitutional provisions apply. These include fairness, equality of opportunity for candidates and a due process sense of fairness to voters which, I would presume, might well include a fair notice of what was at stake.

I haven't thought these through enough to know how likely it is that any case would be successful. And I hope no one ever has to do so. And if the Clintons will play be the rules they agreed to ahead of time, no one will have to.

But perhaps that's too much to ask.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 06:26:02 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, elections are a voter action. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: hannah @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 06:37:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Plural of the non-Latinate, Algonquin word "caucus" is "caucuses" n/t. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 06:55:31 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Pina-gee-gee! (4.00 / 3)

That's a non-Latinate, Siouxian  way of saying Thank You.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:05:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Dear Prudence, its a brand new day (0.00 / 0)

Siouxie and The Banshees

"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 18:21:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Smith vs. Allwright (4.00 / 2)

SCOTUS, 1944. Ruled that Texas' whites-only primary was run by the state and therefore could not discriminate on the basis of race. Point in Paul's favor.

But this is messier:

1. There is no Constitutional principle of the same weight as denying votes on the basis of color
2. The defendant would not be the state - it would be the DNC, which IS private
3. The remedy would be messy: seating delegations elected in uncontested primaries.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:14:54 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Where's Howard Dean on this? (0.00 / 0)

I haven't seen anything from him, though I easily could have missed it.  With the rumors that he would be out of the DNC if Hillary is the winner, he has nothing to lose by coming out hard on this, though I'm not sure what leverage he ultimately has.

Obama has already stated that if he is the nominee (ie gets the delegates without FL and MI), he will then seat the FL and MI delegates.  Obviously, this is different than what Hillary is proposing.

This could get ugly.

---

by: Andrea Calandrella @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 20:53:53 PM CST

DNC (4.00 / 1)

I've read these rumors on the blogs that "Howard Dean will be out" if Hillary Clinton is the nominee.  It has been 40 years since a DNC chair served more than one term - John Baily of Connecticut. He was the first in 20 years to serve more than one term, since Big Jim Farley served more than one term under Franklin Roosevelt. It is a lousy job -lots of traveling, lots of having to deal with people with money, lots of listening to complaints from elected officials.  

Aren't there enough issues to debate in this race without debating over rumors based on speculation?  

In any event, Dean has come out on the issue; the DNC Rules Committee would not have voted to strip delegates if Howard Dean hadn't approved; he appoints the members of the committee.    

Energy and persistence conquer all things.


Benjamin Franklin


 

---

by: Kathy Sullivan @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:03:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You obviously know more history on this (0.00 / 0)

than I do, so it puts it in context.

I wasn't debating on rumors based on speculation, I was just wondering if he had made a statement in response to Hillary's call to seat the delegates, which is against the rules set by the party last fall.  That's all.  

---

by: Andrea Calandrella @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:23:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Imitating Tim Russert (0.00 / 0)

You said, "With the rumors that he would be out of the DNC if Hillary is the winner," he would have nothing to lose by making a statement.    

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:01:21 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Awkwardly worded (0.00 / 0)

Mea culpa, but my intent was to find out if he had made a statement

---

by: Andrea Calandrella @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:12:43 AM CST

[ Parent ]

He was in Europe a few days ago, (0.00 / 0)

meeting with the overseas Democrats.  So, perhaps that's why he's been unavailable to comment.

---

by: hannah @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 06:38:57 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Marc Rich? n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: BTB @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 14:26:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sorry, bad joke. (0.00 / 0)

Where's the delete button on this piece?

---

by: BTB @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 14:27:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Florida's take on it (4.00 / 1)

Here is a detailed post on how Florida dems see it- they will be seated:

http://www.blogforamerica.com/...

---

by: Kathleen O'Donnell @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:03:57 PM CST

Really interesting post, but (0.00 / 0)

doesn't it basically say that once the nominee is chosen, he/she will seat the FL/MI delegates?  So the delegates, while seated, still don't play a role in the decision.

What I'm reading from Team Clinton statements is that they will actively fight to have the delegates matter as part of who becomes the nominee.  But w/o recourse to the courts, as elwood and Kathy note above, how would they do that?

---

by: Dean Barker @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:14:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Florida and Michigan didn't move up to have their delegates count. They did it for early state influence. (0.00 / 0)

And Hillary has given it to Florida.

I'm just waiting to hear Bill Gardner announce that our 2012 Primary will be held in 2010.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:18:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

March of 2012 (0.00 / 0)

I was fairly accurate predicting that the NH First-In-The-Nation Presidential Primary would be in early January, 2008, ahead of Nevada -- and I predicted that about a year before our primary when most everyone was saying we'd be the third event, after Nevada, on or about January 22nd.  So, I'm predicting now that our 2012 NH Presidential Primary WILL be the first, again, and it will be held in March of that year.  Sanity will prevail and the primary schedule will be moved back a bit, where it belongs.  Remember, New Hampshire didn't create this early schedule -- we just reacted to it with our law setting our date "...7 days or more..." ahead of a similar event.  The DNC messed up this year's schedule; and the RNC has done so in years past.  I think both will come to their senses next time around, and stop the micro-scheduling.  Well, I hope so anyway.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:30:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If cooler heads, yourself included, prevail, then we should be so lucky. (0.00 / 0)

My hyperbole on the date of the next primary was aimed at Senator Clinton giving Florida and Michigan cover to continue front-loading the process.

I am well aware that Secretary Gardner will do everything he can to have the Primary as late as is reasonably possible while fulfilling the need to maintain out first in the nation status--as far as I'm concerned, everyone in the New Hampshire Democratic establishment, as well as Secretary Gardner, has done everything right with respect to the Primary this year.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 22:23:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I predict the that the 2012 Primary (4.00 / 5)

 will be "Primarily" (har har) a Republican affair.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 22:32:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

comment of the week (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 22:36:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

A question for Jim Splaine (0.00 / 0)

If the Clintons get there way, and the delegates from Michigan and Florida are seated, how can anyone control the timing to any degree in 2012 when states will have just seen that there is no penalty for jumping the line?

In other words, Jim, don't you think this action could have very serious consequences for the Primary in the future? They will have had four years to put in place all the tools and flexibility that you and Bill Gardner devised to enable us to stay ahead of line jumpers this year. What if fifty states pass laws saying that there primary will be " 7 days or more" ahead of a similar event and enable their secretary of state to set the dates as he/she sees fit.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 06:36:26 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Selective History (0.00 / 0)

New Hampshire has been seated at conventions for both parties even though our primary did not comply with the intial rules of each party, and the world has not come to an end yet. As you know, Wyoming's Republicans this year scheduled their caucus for the same day as NH. There was a time when the Iowa caucus did not precede New Hampshire.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:05:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Paul's point was (0.00 / 0)

Where does it end if there are no rules enforced?

Obsessed is just a word the lazy use to describe the dedicated.

---

by: Justin Credible @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:09:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Paul's Got A Good Question... (2.00 / 2)

...and the answer is our history.  Our "...7 days or more..." law has worked well since the mid-1970s through the years since we are a small state and can indeed organize and facilitate our primary with little lead-time, unlike larger states or even smaller states.  Bill Gardner, following the law, HAS to wait until the other states have set their dates before scheduling ours, which he did with great patience this cycle.  

And, at one time or another each party has played with rules to try to discourage New Hamphsire's primary, BUT the candidates have always come here because it's not about the delegates they get, it's the Wednesday morning headlines and television news stories of "winning" or "being expectations.  We need no party's permission to hold our primary.  We just do it.

Our challenge for 2012 is to encourage the national parties and the states to agree to a schedule which starts later, such as in March, with New Hampshire and Iowa then regional primaries scheduled two weeks apart through May or June.  If that sounds like ideas already circulated, it is:  it's the National Association of Secretary of States' proposal of a decade ago, and the Jimmy Carter Commission proposal of two years ago, adapted slightly by some United States Senators and Congresspeople.  It can work.

If it doesn't work, our challenge for 2012 is to be sure that candidates come to New Hampshire, including the then-President, and campaign here because under our state law we will indeed hold the First-In-The-Nation Primary "...7 days or more..." ahead of any similar election.  And hopefully no pledge of the candidates should stop them from running here because since we pay for our election, we can hold it whenever we wish, and the candidates should come because in a democracy they should be running where the voters want to talk with them.  It will be a case we'll have to make, and hopefully win.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 14:35:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

After November 2008 (0.00 / 0)

After the November election I think a lot of honest conversation needs to take place. Many in NH who think they are protecting the primary actually endanger it but we can talk about all that after November...

Democrats solve problems, Republicans sit and say no.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 18:09:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And Talk Is... (0.00 / 0)

And talk is -- dialogue is -- what needs to go on, and should have months ago, but what has been done is done.  We should each and all realize that no matter our current position of power, none of us by ourselves has all the answers.  He/she/those of us who think otherwise need to be reminded that the more minds we bring to any problem, the better the solution usually is.  I'm ready to offer my thoughts, as is Bill Gardner, in future strategies -- keeping in mind that there are roles for the leadership of the parties in protecting the Primary in 2012, and roles for others, and those roles might not always be the same.  But talk is always good, whether it's in Iraq, Iran, or Concord.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 18:59:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Republican Problem (4.00 / 4)

One on-going problem is that teh Republicans adopt their calendar at their nominating convention, so they will adopt their 2012 rules in 2008.  I don't have any influence over the R's, but it would be a good thing if they didn't do that this year, so that the two parties can get on the same page.    

Energy and persistence conquer all things.


Benjamin Franklin


 

---

by: Kathy Sullivan @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 19:10:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes (0.00 / 0)

Yes.  That would be good.  But no matter what happens...there are possibilities.  And options!

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 19:38:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree- (0.00 / 0)

I am hearing the inevitability chorus again.

The should be a lot more on this in the days to come from the party heads.

---

by: Kathleen O'Donnell @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:20:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The only thing that seems inevitable at this point is a brokered convention. (0.00 / 0)

I just hope we don't have to wait until we actually get to Denver to have a presumptive nominee.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:26:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Pretty conflicted in all of this (4.00 / 3)

The turnout is certainly great news for Democrats. Without any field ops, advertising or full out "campaigning" the Democrats have won another state by a convincing margin, and a bona-fide swing state at that. It really looks like the Republican are screwed in November. (and Wingnut Radio is going eat itself with a McCain Nomination)

With all the talk of nostalgia politics, am I the only one to see the irony (gallows humor?) in FLA being the the middle of electoral controversy again?

Depending on how this is spun and played by the media it will be really good or really bad for Hillary.

While it seems that the seating of the delegates will(would) happen (be negotiated) regardless of nominee, Hillary's approach seems to be to be at odds with the spirit of the DNC agreement. Like MI, an agreement that Edwards and Obama upheld and Clinton did not. Many of her actions around FL play right into the "say anything do anything charge" from the Obama Camp and is another demerit in my book (goes to show a pattern).

I have many reasons to bullish for an Obama nomination, one being my mother forwarding a pro-Obama piece to me and many of her 60something friends today. Two, my 30something sister registering to vote for the first time in CT on Tuesday.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:42:27 PM CST

My mother (4.00 / 2)

Is voting for the first time in a primary. At least since living in MA, which has been at least 16 years.  She's voting for Obama.  Makes me proud.

Feeling hopeful since 2004...

---

by: Kelly Nordstrom @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:47:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

My mom (0.00 / 0)

is saddened by Edwards withdrawal...she never thought he would win, but he brought a passion and commitment to fighting for social justice and fairness, a quality lacking in many of the successful Democratic politicians of my generation.  On the issues she cares about, she admires that he took unpopular political positions, spoke strongly to the importance of American Labor Unions in bolstering the middle class, and how global corporations' mono- culture screws over the little guy,

She has been so committed herself, working for change her entire adult life...on Civil Rights she wrote grant proposals for Breakfast programs before Head Start, she was  head of State Bd. of Mental Health for five years, helped found a Choice group, and ran a lobbying effort that included Sen. Dodd, and passed the first assault rifle ban in CT, ahead of Brady Bill.. This year she testified and helped pass a bill that mandates lost guns be reported as missing, to the police withing 24 hours. Many illegal sales are these very lost guns... the penalty goes up if its' used in a crime and you did not report it missing...I mean she is fully engaged and tutoring inner city kids once a week still...
She's not sure exactly how Obama plans to unite us, but she's not going to vote Hillary after South Carolina, Iraq Iran and Bill, so by default it's Obama!

"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 22:03:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Good for her (0.00 / 0)

it does mean something you know bro'

"Poetry is not an expression of the party line. It's that time of night, lying in bed, thinking what you really think, making the private world public, that's what the poet does." Allen Ginsberg

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 21:48:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

my sister too (0.00 / 0)

actually two of my sisters are really excited about Obama. Both are in New York. Only one of them can vote (the other is 16)...

Change is inevitable, but progress is not. Working together, we can make sure that change = progress. And that's what makes us progressive...

---

by: KarenLH @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 00:13:29 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Michigan (0.00 / 0)

Hillary Clinton did not campaign in Michigan. Was her name ont he ballot? Yes, but that did not violate the DNC rules.  The other candidates (excluding Chris Dodd), in an effort to win support in NH, pulled their names and then accused her of breaking the pledge.  It was a faux controversy created for political gain - note that none of the candidates pulled their names from the Florida ballot, and note further that Senator Obama continued to go to Florida for fundraising. I'm not being critical of them for doing what they did - it was a crafty political move, albeit one that did not work, given the outcome in New Hampshire.          

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:10:41 AM CST

[ Parent ]

But I never said... (4.00 / 2)

"The other candidates (excluding Chris Dodd), in an effort to win support in NH, pulled their names and then accused her of breaking the pledge.  It was a faux controversy created for political gain - "

Well... from my perspective that's like taking a pledge not to invest in Sudan, but not pulling out what investments you currently have there. True, no new investments were made, but... To a civilian like me this is a little weaselly. But maybe it depends on whose ox is being gored.

In FL, both Obama and Clinton played a little loose with the no-campaigning pledge. Clinton was pandering to FL voters ("I feel your pain and I'll be your champion") from outside the border and Obama had his national cable ad buy. But Obama hasn't suddenly (and conveniently) become outraged at the injustice of it all.

The bottom line is, regardless of all the political-speak, I'm just put off with Hillary Clinton and her campaign at this point. Last summer/fall I was really impressed with Hillary. I liked her command of the stage, her fluent grasp of current events, and her unifying, leaderly tone. But that was when she was the inevitable nominee. Since then she has slowly devolved into a candidate for whom I have ever decreasing respect.

Not as smart as I think I am, but not as dumb as I look.

---

by: epm @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 10:20:30 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Very well put. (4.00 / 1)

I think you capture the sentiments of most.  

Obsessed is just a word the lazy use to describe the dedicated.

---

by: Justin Credible @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:59:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

UL Blog War: Hillary Clinton is a liar. (0.00 / 0)

I am glad I settled in up thereya. Looks like you will need "all hands on deck" to keep NH Blue.

McCain will challenge the Dem nominee for the ROC/LOC. One thing for sure, the divisive Mrs.Clinton has given him a leg up.

Hillary's word: It's worth nothing

Tuesday, Jan. 29, 2008

COURTING VOTERS in Iowa and New Hampshire, last August Sen. Hillary Clinton signed a pledge not to "campaign or participate" in the Michigan or Florida Democratic primaries. She participated in both primaries and is campaigning in Florida. Which proves, again, that Hillary Clinton is a liar.

Clinton kept her name on the Michigan ballot when others removed theirs, she campaigned this past weekend in Florida, and she is pushing to seat Michigan and Florida delegates at the Democratic National Convention. The party stripped those states of delegates as punishment for moving up their primary dates.

"I will try to persuade my delegates to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida," Clinton said last week, after the New Hampshire primaries and Iowa caucuses were safely over.

Clinton coldly and knowingly lied to New Hampshire and Iowa. Her promise was not a vague statement. It was a signed pledge with a clear and unequivocal meaning.

She signed it thinking that keeping the other candidates out of Michigan and Florida was to her advantage, but knowing she would break it if that proved beneficial later on. It did, and she did.

New Hampshire voters, you were played for suckers.

Ya, know. I'm leaving my options open, if Clinton/Penn/Clinton is the nom.
I'm sure a couple of NH visionaries like PH and CSP could use a keyboard or two. Then, at least, I could blog with a clear conscience.


www.KusterforCongress.com  

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 06:52:03 AM CST

Jack, you know I'm on your side, but the UL is just a little bit less Clinton-friendly as Newt Gingrich circa 1998. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:24:28 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Stumpin' for McCain (4.00 / 1)

That is what the UL is doing.

Sad thing is Clinton/Penn/Clinton gave them the talking points.

www.KusterforCongress.com  

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 18:06:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Just sticking up for the voters. (0.00 / 0)

Where have I heard that before?... I don't want to draw too close a comparison, but this has a nostalgic whiff of Lieberman c. 2006. Not in specifics, but in spirit.

If Hillary doesn't win the Dem nomination (and that's a huge IF), does she go CFL... in a manner of speaking? Does she want to be the Democratic president of the United States? Or would she do an "I know better then the party" and continue to run anyway?

I could be off base, but I'm getting a Liebermanesque vibe here.

Not as smart as I think I am, but not as dumb as I look.

---

by: epm @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:52:52 AM CST

DNC v. Democratic (0.00 / 0)

Maybe it is because I spent two years fighting with the DNC over their efforts to shove NH aside, but there is a difference between the DNC and the Democratic Party. And there is a big difference between someone refusing to accept the decision of the voters in a primary, and suggesting that the decision of the party leadership on a rule was not correct.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 16:43:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]