Abs’s Jake Tapper reported yesterday on an unnamed Democratic Party official saying that it’s not a question of *if* Clinton can somehow secure the nomination. The question is -- what will she have to do in order to achieve it? The official’s answer: She will have to "break his back," to destroy Obama and make him completely unacceptable. "Her securing the nomination is certainly possible - but it will require exercising the 'Tonya Harding option.'" the official said. Read full story here - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/dnc-official-cl.html).
As the Clinton campaign spins Obama as actually being the reprehensibly negative player in this competition, and the media swallowing and regurgitating the most incendiary non-issues, (consider today’s self-righteous "all I know is that if it were me personally, I would have left that church), I fear for the future of Obama’s campaign, of the Democratic party, and the United States. I’m afraid we can’t take another two months of the destructive Clinton ambition machine. Please contact the Democratic National Committee (http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contactissues) and let the party leaders no that we can’t waste any more time; the train is nearing the bridge that’s out, and it takes a lot to stop that kind of fateful momentum. Superdelegates must decide *now*, not in August, to swing behind the best candidate in our generation so that the Democratic Party can look forward to the general election in November and beyond.

This doesn't hurt Hilary--it helps her. She wants the state to be revoted.

Both Obama and Clinton are wrong. Hillary can't seriously consider it fair to allot the votes as it stands now. Barack is only hurting himself by not agreeing to a re-vote. If it were South Carolina instead of Michigan, Obama would be insistent on a re-vote. It doesn't appear to be "new" politics but the "same old" politics by both sides.

As a long time resident of Michigan I can attest to the fact that the all voters of Michigan, both Dem and Rep, do not care if those delegates go to McCain or to one of the Denver candidates. We believe in open votes - let half those folks go to Denver and half go to the twin cities, and let each cast his ballots in a random way. Only in that way can we be TRUELY FAIR to our finish tradition and to our start tradition and that is most certainly true as we all know from our days on the New London County USS LST1066 back in 1967 as it sailed off the coast of East China on its way to Olangapo.

Obama Camp manager thinks he is smart.
His name was not on ballot and Clinton was atleast on the ballot and he proposed half half.
How could he even put forward such math.

If Obama is a uniter and a person who appeals to all, then why not do another primary.

Be a spirit Obama. Lets get the delegates on your strength not just share without any effort

Only in that way can we be TRUELY FAIR to our finish tradition and to our start tradition and that is most certainly true as we all know from our days on the New London County USS LST1066 back in 1967 as it sailed off the coast of East China on its way to Olangapo.

Posted by: John W Claussen | March 26, 2008 6:16 PM

Wow, those are some good drugs, huh?

I honestly don't know what helps or hurts Hillary in getting these states counted, anymore. I know that no votes being counted at the convention from MI or Fla makes Howard Dean look really bad.

Please stop the hypocrisy, Clinton camp! DNC set the calendar and all the candidates signed pledges to abide by those rules. The leadership (for lack of a better word) of MI and FL chose to break the rules and therefore are subject to the penalties.

HRC said on 10/10/07 on New Hampshire Public Radio’s show, “The Exchange:
NHPR: So, if you value the DNC calendar, why not just pull out of Michigan? Why not just say, Hey Michigan, I'm off the ballot?"

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said.

Top Clinton campaign advisor Harold ICKES:
As a DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee member, he voted last year to strip the two states of their delegates as punishment for moving their primaries up too early, "to prevent the gaming of the system."
Now he supports seating the delegates. "When I voted on the Rules and Bylaws Committee, I did that as a member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee, not as a member of the Hillary Clinton campaign."

Clinton campaign advisor Terry McCAULIFFE argues for seating the FL and MI delegates. But in 2004, as head of the DNC, when MI threatened to hold an early vote he said, "Move your primary too early, and Michigan will lose half its delegates to the 2004 Democratic convention. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television," he vowed. "I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules."

So, the rules are the rules. No to MI and FL.

Michigan shot itself in the foot, Clinton and Obama didn't stop them, but now Clinton is yelling, "Ouch. Obama shot me!"

Please -- we have long ago passed the point of diminishing returns on this campaign. It is time to stop voting and revoting. Everybody with 2 neurons to fire knows that Clinton cannot come out ahead in delegates, votes, or states. Even with Michigan and Florida.

It is time for journalists to stop calling Clinton's win "unlikely" and start calling it for what it is: "impossible."

What did Obama promise in his debate with Hillary, to work to seat the delegates of Fla. & Mich.

Just another one of his say one thing, do another.

For the millionth time, it isn't Obama's decision to have a revote in Mich or Fl, nor does he have the ability to seat delegates, etc.
The Republicans led by Crist are the ones that MADE the Democrats move up their primary.

I'm tired of all this! HRC needs to gracefully bow out now. I'm so tired of Republicans I'll vote for the democratic nominee no matter who they are. I'll be smiling and proud if it's Barack.

Michigan's loss has NOTHING to do with Obama. They broke party rules, were warned that they'd lose their seats, and then they did it anyway. And Hillary agreed. Now that she's behind, she's chaging her mind. Obama's campaign opposed the last proposal because it did not allow people who had voted Republican in the last election (and they would have done so because they knew a Democratic vote would be a waste since it wouldn't count) to now vote Democratic in the re-vote. Get your facts straight, ppl.

REPLY TO electress | March 26, 2008 7:35 PM

Yes, he did say that. The crux is to FAIRLY seat the delegates.
If there were a FAIR way to have a revote--meaning there was adequate time and money to set it up properly--he would do it.

But what was proposed by the Clinton camp was a primary paid for with private money pledged by big-money donors, HER SUPPORTERS; that's not even legal. (And the money was just pledged--it wasn't even guaranteed and wouldn't have covered the full costs.) Then the legislature wanted the Obama camp to sign off on legislation that was not yet written! What would you say to somebody who said, Here--sign this contract, but I'll tell you what it says later?

That's why Obama's camp and many other entities have proposed seating the delegates 50/50. It allows the delegations to participate at the convention, but it does not allow a meaningless primary to affect the ultimate outcome.

It is cynical, disingenuous, and damaging to the Democratic party for the Clinton camp to accuse Obama of "disenfranchising" the voters of MI and FL.

It's the ultimate in self-serving, unprincipled, and win-at-all-costs tactics.

It's shameful!

MI or Fla makes Howard Dean look really bad.

Posted by: Jeff |

The other 48 states make Fl and Mi look bad. These states made themselves look bad. Don't know what part of rules are rules you can't understand, and really you don't care, it's just a way to stir the pot isn't it?

GET THIS: In Michigan, Hillary Clinton was the ONLY major canidate on the ballot. However, she could ONLY win 55 PERCENT of the Democratic voters in Michegan. HMMM...doesn't that sound odd? 45 percent of the Michigan people who voted in the Democratic primary refused to vote for Hillary and chose to vote for a minor candidate or uncommitted. If Barack would have been on the ballot, then who knows how many people would have voted for him instead of Hillary and no one knows how many of the uncommitted folks would have voted for Barack, because they certainly were not voting for Hillary.

Barack has NEVER said he did not support a re-vote in Michigan. He rejected the last suggestion because it was unfair and was set up to only favor Hillary. If Michigan could come up with a fair primary, Barack has said he would go for it. If the situation was reversed, you better believe Hillary would have the same reaction!!!
In addition, the State of Michigan and Florida should be the ones who set up another election and pay for it. After all, it was the Michigan legislatures and Florida officials who decided to have the election early knowing the Democratic delegates would not be seated. Don't blame this mess on anyone but the people who created this mess.
Plus, if delegates were seated 50-50, there is no guarantee all the Obama delegates would vote for Obama and all the Hillary delegates would vote for Hillary.

Once again Obama camp attempts to take the high road, when in actuality they are burrowing in the sludge of dirty politics. If Obama's support is sooooo great, then why not support a revote? Could it be they are afraid? Could it be that the color we see is yellow? Could it be that "equality" is considered when it benefits their side? Hillary is willing to do a revote in Michigan, even though many say, Obama is a "movement". Number should be against her, but she is willing to take that chance. Is Obama showing his true colors is his choice? Yes, I support Hillary as the best candidate. Obama is a good person, and a possible candidate, just not now. Show us all what we think you are capable of. Don't give in to . . . politics.

The Michigan delegates should be seated either as is, or in a new election, the Obama campaign just fears loosing Michigan if there is a re-vote because they know the Feburary momentum is all but a memory.

We the people of Florida and Michigan have cast our votes. The Clinton campaign agrees that our votes should count. The Obama campaign wants to disregard how we voted and start over. He was on the ballot in Florida and told his supporters in Michigan to vote "Uncomitted". It's clear to me and most of the people I know. We voted, we chose Hillary Clinton overwhelmingly 50% to 33% in Florida. In Michigan, Hillary Clinton received 55% and "Uncomitted" received 40%. The "Uncommitted" 40% should be split between Obama and Edwards since they both told their supporters to vote "Uncommitted". It seems to me Obama will play fair only when he wins!!

I’m afraid we can’t take another two months of the destructive Clinton ambition machine. Please contact the Democratic National Committee (http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contactissues) and let the party leaders no that we can’t waste any more time; the train is nearing the bridge that’s out, and it takes a lot to stop that kind of fateful momentum. Superdelegates must decide *now*, not in August, to swing behind the best candidate in our generation so that the Democratic Party can look forward to the general election in November and beyond.

Posted by: Martha Davidson | March 26, 2008 5:44 PM

Hey Martha...it's a good thing that you are nobody, because I would seriously hate it if you had the ability to make a decision that affected my life...make that "infected".
The DNC is well aware of their surroundings...probably and apparently more than you. They are already tightroping the whole FL and MI fiasco they have created and live to regret...just like the last two elections they managed to lose. If anything, they are going to do the right thing and let all the voters..(well, except for the two huge states they kicked to the curb, along with the millions of voters who went to the curb with them, tally up the delegates and check the popular vote totals, have a meeting with the super delegates on who at that time is the most electable candidate and if they actually do, then the only outcome that they will be able to follow is nominating Hillary...because she is the only one of the two Dems that can even think about beating McCain. With BO they would lodge their swiftboat up so far that they might have to build a new one.

"If Barack would have been on the ballot, then who knows how many people would have voted for him instead of Hillary and no one knows how many of the uncommitted folks would have voted for Barack"....really???? Then why did he take his name off the ballot?? No one told him to. Why did he run tv ads in FL when they had pledged not to campaign there?? Man, Barack sure can fool some of he people some of the tims. It's really sad that some of the people on here are so in the dark about his motives...especially the motives for the crap he does under the table. It's a good thing he won't be the next POTUS.

Obama keeps playing this game with his issued statements -- does he really think voters are that stupid?

He doesn't want a revote because he doesn't want to take the chance to fall behind Hillary. Everybody knows that.

And it is sad. The people should have a say. The democrats will be throwing MI and FL away if we do not respect and honor their rights, and do a re-do.

If we ignore them, McCain will carry two important states. This is ludicrous.

Obama, play fair, and let the people speak. If you don't play fair, and then you are the nominee, I just don't know how I can vote for you.

Michigan should already have a re do on the calendar. There is only one reason they don't.

The DNC approved the re-do
Hillary agreed to the re do.
Hillary's Michigan supporters wanted the re do.

Obama would not agree to the re-do.
Obama Michigan supporter said they would block a re-do

The Republican controlled house and senate heard the Obama supporters and said whats the point of trying to get a re-do. We like the idea of running against Obama in November.

say it like it is.. Michigan you do not have a re do already on the schedule because of Senator Barack Obama! Not the DNC and not Senator Hillary Clinton

What a bias article. Obama is the coward. Listen to what he has said about a American style fair election...NO! We want to be given 50% even though we didn't earn them. Sounds like he is afraid and wants special treatment..oh yeah I forgot, he is used to that by the media.

To not allow the people of MI and FL to vote in the primary and to count those votes, is a violation of their civil rights. If Obama is really for civil rights, then he has to push for some sort of new vote, or to count the votes already cast. Otherwise, he is not really for civil rights. He is for himself.

Let the vote stand is what I say and they must be counted for this to be a legit election! Barack Obama chose to remove his name from the ballot, a bad judgment call for a man who claims to have good jugments but then that must only be about wars!
Let Hillary Clinton have what she won and give him the undecided, that sounds fair to me. To note even Dennis Kucinich had the good judgment to keep his name on the Michigan which the media forgets to tell you. That's a man short a card from a full deck too!
Voting is a god given democratic right and not one person even Howard Dean should have the power to take any votes away from anyone regardless of when they were cast! The Democratic Party has lacked leadership and that lies on the shoulders of Howard Dean, if our party breaks it is because of him not the candidates!

Let the vote stand is what I say and they must be counted for this to be a legit election! Barack Obama chose to remove his name from the ballot, a bad judgment call for a man who claims to have good jugments but then that must only be about wars!
Let Hillary Clinton have what she won and give him the undecided, that sounds fair to me. To note even Dennis Kucinich had the good judgment to keep his name on the Michigan which the media forgets to tell you. That's a man short a card from a full deck too!
Voting is a god given democratic right and not one person even Howard Dean should have the power to take any votes away from anyone regardless of when they were cast! The Democratic Party has lacked leadership and that lies on the shoulders of Howard Dean, if our party breaks it is because of him not the candidates!

Not only should the voters in Michigan and Florida be outraged, but all of us should be concerned. Because our "represenatives" made an error, people are being denied a right to vote...? I am sure the powers that be will be happy with this because sending the message that a voter does not have real power (deja vous 2000) cause people not to vote in November. This is essentially handing the election over to McCain.
How is it that the Republicans decided to award half of the delagates? Because they know how to win! Democrats wake up and fight for your rights!

We all know Obama will not agree to a revote because he's doing what he always does says one thing he thinks you want to hear and does another, so much for change. He wants to be honest, well how about acknowledging you can't win in November without Mi and Fl and the folks who are now fed up with your hokie pokie. My family and I will not vote for you in November either if there is no revote.

We all know Obama will not agree to a revote because he's doing what he always does says one thing he thinks you want to hear and does another, so much for change. He wants to be honest, well how about acknowledging you can't win in November without Mi and Fl and the folks who are now fed up with your hokie pokie. My family and I will not vote for you in November either if there is no revote.

Another article bias against Clinton! I am absolutely sick of all the bias we're being barraged by both in print and broadcasts. The people in MI and FL voted. Their vote should count! I agree with Steve: MI & FL exercised their democratic right to vote and the DNC should not have the power to disenfranchise these people.

What I can,t understand is how anyone would want to put a rule before a vote. Now the DNC came in and told the delegates that if they move their primary up they would be penalized. Well what the DNC forgot to do was to tell all the superdelegates to explain this particular rule to the voteing public. This is the problem with a inhouse rule that only a select group of people fully understood at the time. So was it the voters fault or the rules commitee? I think it falls on the commitee. But hey maybe they on the commitee should read their own platform form time to time, maybe they forgot about honoring the vote!

Florida and Michigan (collectively) account for 9% of Americans and more than 8% of Democratic delegates. They could affect the outcome of the nomination race, and therefore the general election and the nation's future. To take their voice away because of the boneheaded decisions of legislatures to play chicken with the parties is a slap in the face of popular sovereignty. Let the people, not party insiders, decide which delegates to seat.

On February 8, 2008, Barack Obama told reporters that he would be “fine” with a new primary in Michigan if it could be done in a way that gave him and Senator Clinton time to make their respective cases and the DNC signed off. See video at http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=sxiQ2J0fV5M. Since then, such a plan has garnered broad support from top Michigan lawmakers and the DNC has given its blessing.

However, it turns out that Senator Obama’s comments about being fine with a re-vote if the above conditions were met were just words. Yesterday’s headline in the Detroit Free-Press made clear that Senator Obama is the lone standout: “Michigan do-over depends on Obama's backing, Senate leaders say.”

The Clinton campaign argues that the right to vote is a bedrock principle of our country and that empowering the people of Michigan and Florida to make their voices heard must be a priority for any candidate running for the Democratic nomination. As such, we must either honor the original vote or hold a state-run primary that doesn’t leave the taxpayers footing the bill. So why is the Obama campaign refusing to give the people of Michigan the chance to exercise their right to vote?

I believe in fair play. I remember people who do not play fair. Remember, we learned how to play fair in kindergarten. Hillary has played fair in this race. She is by far the best candidate of the three. If Obama blocks Michigan and Florida in accepting the current votes, or by revoting, then in November, I will cast my vote to block him from becoming President. And, I know a lot of Democrats in Georgia who will do the same thing. We consider John McCain half Democrat anyway!
Nancy in Georgia

Barack did not use very good JUDGEMENT when he removed his name from the Michigan ballot. Hillary can see things down the road. Much better foresight!

Whoever thought Obama is a "new kind" of politician should seek immediate psychiatric help. Obama is indeed the worst kind of sniping politician who says one thing and does totally the opposit. He's a new kind of George W. Bush. Dangerously uncanny!!

I must quote one blogger here: "Barack is only hurting himself by not agreeing to a re-vote. If it were South Carolina instead of Michigan, Obama would be insistent on a re-vote. It doesn't appear to be "new" politics but the "same old" politics by both sides."

Amen
Jovis

Obama speaks out of both sides of his mouth and his "new" politics seems just like the old politics he abhors. He refuses to agree to MI and FL delegates being seated is, because that would obviously favor Hillary (even tho it's the fairest solution because she won both states). He refuses a revote because she's already won in those states and he doesn't want to lose. His sense of "fairness" is questionable - to split the delegates, even tho she won both states is absurd. He wants to be a uniter, but he alientates voters in two states because he did once and ight again lose.

FL and MI will come back to haunt him and the Dems generally if they don't solve this problem fairly. Having a revote at this point is the fairest of all.

Wish people weren't so blind to Obama's slick tactics: he says one thing, and does another...

I believe this paper and many others just like it should dtop the biased reporting, this has gotten completely out of hand. I do not think Democrats should stand for this no matter what side your on. I listen and read everyday how one sided reporting has gotten and I dont like it at all.

The trouble with the revote is not just 'who is going to pay'? The real trouble that I see is how valid would a privately funded, privately executed election be seen in the eyes of the law.

Let's not forgot that the only culprits here are the elected officials in MI and FL. They voted to change the dates knowing the consequences. They did this for selfish reasons as a way to highlight their state and local issues at the expense of voters. They figured that their votes wouldn't matter anyway, so what was the harm? Now they're playing CYA to stay in office after Nov.

Obama has been fighting the proposals set forth by the Clinton campaign. Obama cites that he is following the original rules of the primary that both candidates agreed to and abide by up until Clinton could no longer win without these states.

What Obama is not publicly saying is that he is flatly rejecting the notion of accepting an election that is paid for by Clinton and carried out by a contractor of Clinton's choosing.

There are legal issues, too. Any revote would require that the original voting rules are applied. For instance, the original MI primary was open - Reps and Dems could vote for either party. A new vote would have to exclude any Dem, Rep, or Ind that voted in the Republican primary. This would be grounds for lawsuits challenging the legality of such a vote.

The implication here is that we cannot simply cherry pick a revote of one contest out of the MI primary. You either redo the entire primary (Rep & Dem), or you let the original results stand - that is to say remain invalid under the original rules that all parties agreed to last year.

For Obama and Clinton, this is a serious problem. Take Obama for instance - why won't he allow a MI revote?

1) Clinton has offered to pay for a new vote that both candidates would be bound to. Obama is not in favor of an election financed by his rival's private donors.

2) Clinton has offered to use a private contractor to conduct a mail-in or 'fire house' primary. Again, Obama is not in favor of a Clinton contractor conducting a Clinton funded election.

3) The decision is not Obama or Clinton's to make. It is the state that decides, the DNC to approve, and the candidates to abide.

Well, okay, some would still say this is a gray area. So why not allow a FL mail-in revote?

1) It is currently illegal in Florida to vote by mail. The state had a sour experience with massive tampering and voter fraud in past mail-in elections. The state would have to legalize mail-in votes to allow the Clinton proposal to materialize.

2) It is currently illegal in Florida to allow private contractors access to voter registration data. In other words, a private company cannot hold a legally binding election in the state of Florida.

3) As with MI, the decision is not Obama or Clinton's to make. It is the state that decides, the DNC to approve, and the candidates to abide.

One last little nugget. As much as we like to think we live in a pure Democracy (every vote counts), the reality is that America is a Republic. Our votes select representatives to make the authoritative decisions. Our primary season votes determine delegate allocations. The delegates determine the nominee. Period.

Michigan and Florida voters must be heard, votes must be counted, and delegates must be seated. It's unfair that the voters were denied the value of their votes. Splitting the votes equally between the two candidates is the worst because that was not intended by the voters. Why penalize the people of Florida and Michigan, it was the party leaders fault for pursuing on the primary. Let the people's voice prevail.

How can anyone think that because a committee heading by Howard Dean should be allowed to negate the will of the Democratic party members in Michigan and Florida? All that Barack has to do is say "let the people speak". Obviously he does not want to hear from the core democrats. He only wants to hear from Republican states which love the flawed caucus system. After all it can be control by good organization and manipulation. I can see why Barack likes it when we see the results of secret balloting for him. He loses. By the way, why does the DNC need a candidates permission to make this decision? All they need to do is make it a fair secret ballot election and accept paying for from donations. The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for the DNC's mistake.

This is not right. All Democrats deserve to vote. MI and FL need to be respected as Americans. I do not understand why Obama has not fought harder for the people of America if he is such a uniter.

Also, I think it is highly disrespectful for Obama's superdelegate supporters to try to call the race over now, and it shows that they do NOT care about the remaining states that are as much a part of this country as the ones that already had their primaries. Shame on Obama and the DNC.