PDA

View Full Version : To seat or not seat FL, MI delegates..



George Gervin's Afro
02-13-2008, 02:11 PM
SHARPTON CALLS ON THE DNC TO NOT SEAT MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA DELEGATES
Wed Feb 13 2008 09:42:14 ET

Dear Governor Dean:

I write this letter as a former Democratic candidate for President of the United States and a civil rights leader who has fought his entire life for fairness and justice for all people regardless of the color of their skin. I firmly believe that changing the rules now, and seating delegates from Florida and Michigan at this point would not only violate the Democratic party's rules of fairness, but also would be a grave injustice.

As former Presidential candidates we both know that, whether we liked them or not, we adhered to the rules set forth by the Democratic party to select its nominee for president. For example, I would have much preferred starting the nominating process with caucuses and primaries in South Carolina and Washington D.C. than Iowa and New Hampshire. Nonetheless, I knew the rules, abided by them, and ultimately accepted the consequences. Changing the rules in the middle of a presidential contest is patently unfair both to the candidates (including Senator Edwards) and to Democratic voters everywhere.

Some have said that not seating delegations from Florida and Michigan disenfranchises Democratic voters -- especially African American voters -- from those two states. That claim, if true, should have been made many months ago before the decision was made to strip these states of their delegates, and, once the decision was made, it should have been vigorously objected to and contested by those who felt it disenfranchised voters. To raise that claim now smacks of politics in its form most raw and undercuts the moral authority behind such an argument.

As a civil rights leader who is neutral in this presidential primary season and who highly respects both remaining Democratic candidates, I think we have a responsibility to protect both candidates from charges that the process was tainted so that our eventual nominee does not start the general election campaign under a cloud. Clearly, the justifiably proud and intense passions of each candidate's supporters will be on full display in the months leading up to the convention. However, the Democratic Party and independent voices within must temper over enthusiasm by either side and the party must be resolute in ensuring that there is one set of rules by which we select our nominee.

In Progress,

Reverend Al Sharpton, President of National Action Network


This should be fun..

DarkReign
02-13-2008, 02:18 PM
no.

JoeChalupa
02-13-2008, 02:22 PM
No.

Mr. Body
02-13-2008, 02:59 PM
Nope.

If necessary re-do them. It won't be necessary, though.

Mr. Peabody
02-13-2008, 03:18 PM
Not unless they have another election or they seat them according to the national polls.

01.20.09
02-13-2008, 03:40 PM
No. It was agreed upon by all candidates.

Jelly
02-13-2008, 03:46 PM
Every now and then, Sharpton gets it right on the money. Hillary should be ashamed of herself for trying to pull something so unfair. She doesn't seem to have any qualms about tainting and abusing the process as long as she gets her way.

101A
02-13-2008, 04:02 PM
Every now and then, Sharpton gets it right on the money. Hillary should be ashamed of herself for trying to pull something so unfair. She doesn't seem to have any qualms about tainting and abusing the process as long as she gets her way.Democrats now understand this, huh? (Her husband was the same way)

Jelly
02-13-2008, 04:44 PM
Democrats now understand this, huh? (Her husband was the same way)

yeah, well, I never supported her husband. Kerry was the first democrat I ever voted for.

T Park
02-13-2008, 06:58 PM
Did you vote for him before you voted against him?

mikejones99
02-14-2008, 05:07 AM
MI n FL are not real states

Oh, Gee!!
02-14-2008, 12:57 PM
Democrats now understand this, huh? (Her husband was the same way)


Her husband was a good president

Oh, Gee!!
02-14-2008, 12:57 PM
no, don't include them

Wild Cobra
02-14-2008, 02:59 PM
It wouldn't be fair to include their votes. I know, it can be said that these voters are disenfranchised, but they let their states do this to them.

It wouldn't be fair to the candidates. Since the state wasn't in play, some didn't campaign and get their message out. If the people of these states want their vote to count, then they need to speak up now and set a new primary date with time to allow the candidates to campaign in their states.

DarkReign
02-14-2008, 03:07 PM
It wouldn't be fair to include their votes. I know, it can be said that these voters are disenfranchised, but they let their states do this to them.

It wouldn't be fair to the candidates. Since the state wasn't in play, some didn't campaign and get their message out. If the people of these states want their vote to count, then they need to speak up now and set a new primary date with time to allow the candidates to campaign in their states.

Very true. Cant speak for Florida, but the only Dem names on the ballot were Clinton and (i think) Kucinich.

Why she didnt get shit from her party for having her name on the ballot is beyond me.

BTW, look out for our governor to campaign FOR Michigan's delegates to be seated. She is female, after all and heavily in Clinton's Court. Fucking Canadian bitch....

TheProfessor
02-14-2008, 03:12 PM
I don't think you can even set a new primary date. Hillary has campaigned so much for this that it will give the false impression of her winning the vote for Michigan and Florida; she gets to ride in like a hero saying she championed them the entire time. That's an unfair advantage when Barack and Edwards were following the party line, only to get screwed later. Why would anyone trust the DNC again?

DisgruntledLionFan#54,927
02-14-2008, 03:20 PM
Dodd, Gravel, Kucinich and Clinton were the only names on the ballot in Michigan, IIRC.

MannyIsGod
02-14-2008, 03:36 PM
Did you vote for him before you voted against him?Do you know how the Senate works or do you just regurgitate shit? I love how Kerry explaining to people how the senate process works got turned into the biggest gaff of his campaign because we live in a sound bite driven world.

Congrats, our country has the attention span of a peanut.

MannyIsGod
02-14-2008, 03:37 PM
Eventually you have to find a way to seat those delegations. If you don't, you're going to hurt yourself in the general.

boutons_
02-15-2008, 06:28 PM
http://www.miamiherald.com/884/story/418611.html

boutons_
02-15-2008, 08:20 PM
In a national climate defined by dubya and the Repugs where rules and laws exist to be broken by the elitists and gamer, and where only losers and suckers have to obey, I bet the DNC rule to exclude MI and FL gets broken to give the election the Hillary. That will piss off millions of Barack supporters, but since when do the elite give a fuck about mere voters?

Vast majorities in the US and Iraq want the US out of Iraq, but are totally ignored.

Aggie Hoopsfan
02-15-2008, 09:08 PM
So if Obama wins, does this mean every time someone criticizes our president that Sharpton (and you can surmise Jessie J.) are going to line up and play the race card?

2centsworth
02-15-2008, 10:30 PM
if Obama wins because Florida and MI delegates didn't get seated, does it mean he stole the election?

boutons_
02-15-2008, 10:50 PM
'does it mean he stole the election"

he didn't make the rule, he agreed to it, as did Hillary and Edwards, he didn't force FL and MI to move up their delegate selection, that was their own initiaive, against the rule. can't pin this one on Barack.

Aggie Hoopsfan
02-16-2008, 02:27 AM
if Obama wins because Florida and MI delegates didn't get seated, does it mean he stole the election?

Nope, he agreed to the rules before they started.

It'd be akin to changing the rules in a poker game so you could make a bigger one now you know you had a good hand after your opponent already bluffed you out of the hand.

Spawn
02-16-2008, 04:35 AM
So if Obama wins, does this mean every time someone criticizes our president that Sharpton (and you can surmise Jessie J.) are going to line up and play the race card?

It'll make up for the Bush administration always playing the 9/11 card.

jochhejaam
02-16-2008, 08:14 AM
No. It was agreed upon by all candidates.
Ditto

Marklar MM
02-16-2008, 02:46 PM
if Obama wins because Florida and MI delegates didn't get seated, does it mean he stole the election?

Nope.

I'm confused
02-16-2008, 04:35 PM
Well the candidates agreed to it so the argument supporting this stance is solid..So let's assume Obama wins..can he kiss MI and FL goodbye to the GOP in the national race? That's whats going to happen.. it's a lose lose for the Dems..they stand on principle on lose both states in the general election..

2centsworth
02-16-2008, 04:46 PM
so if Hillary is successful and gets MI and FL delegates, does that mean she stole the election?

Holt's Cat
02-16-2008, 05:25 PM
so if Hillary is successful and gets MI and FL delegates, does that mean she stole the election?

Nah, that just means she agreed to something and went back on it when it would benefit her.

Jamtas#2
02-17-2008, 03:02 AM
Well Hilary was the one who said that Obama only talks about change, and she would be the one to put it in action. Maybe having this rule changed to favor her would be her first action.

Holt's Cat
02-17-2008, 06:51 PM
It's hard to see Michigan, with 8% unemployment or whatever, not going to the Dems.

The larger issue is if Clinton somehow garners the nomination without getting a larger share of the delegates won through the primaries and caucuses due to the superdelegates and/or seating the Michigan delegation with the delegates distributed according to the results of a primary vote in which Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot.