Delegate challenges concerning Florida, Michigan to be heard

[Richard Tafoya]

AP:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PRIMARY_SCRAMBLE?SITE=FLMYR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

A plan to award half-delegates for the disputed Michigan and Florida Democratic presidential primaries will get a hearing before party leaders.
The co-chairs of the Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws committee sent members a memo Friday announcing a meeting May 31 to consider the idea.

...

Under the challenges, all superdelegates from both states would get to vote. The pledged delegates would only count for half votes.

Hillary Rodham Clinton won both contests and has been pushing for the delegates to be seated.

Her rival Barack Obama has said it isn't fair to award delegates based on the votes because all the candidates agreed to boycott the contests and his name wasn't on Michigan's ballot. Most of the Democratic candidates had their names removed, but Clinton left hers on. Forty percent of Michigan voters chose "uncommitted" rather than vote for Clinton.

...


If it were valid, Florida's election would have given Clinton 105 delegates to Obama's 67. Michigan's would have given Clinton 73 delegates, while 55 were uncommitted. That means awarding half-delegates would give Clinton 89 more delegates and Obama 33.5, with 27.5 uncommitted.

The plan would narrow Obama's lead among the pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses. But Clinton still would not catch him in the remaining primaries.

Obama has a 154-delegate lead among pledged delegates.

[DoubleEdgeSword]

I don't think it's fair. Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. Look, the party leaders can't have it both ways. They stripped the delegates. So be it. I think the whole thing was stupid and petty, but the DNC, Florida and Michigan made their beds...

[Richard Tafoya]

Don't forget that in Florida's case, it was the state GOP--who controlled the state legislature and governor's seat--that initiated the date change. The state's Dem legislators didn't put up all that much of a fight, but the date was chosen by the GOP, who knew that they'd lose half of their own delegates with the date.

[DoubleEdgeSword]

All true, Richard. Stupid idea all the way around.

[tiger_rascal]

Its a free country.

I say just give them to Hillary! :love:

[pinky]

Am I reading this correctly? The superdelegates get a full vote, the elected ones would only get a half?

If that's the case, they might as well just hand Michigan and Florida to McCain in November.

[tiger_rascal]

Vote Hillary. She is more patriotic and pretty and, ummm, stuff. :nod:

[lions1mew]

:eek:

I think Barack Obama is prettier ... so there *sticks out tongue*

Seriously though, as DES said, they made these decisions months ago. Time to stick to it or I can just hear the other side now ... "FLIP! FLOP!"

[pinky]

:eek:

I think Barack Obama is prettier ... so there *sticks out tongue*


Good, your tongue sticking out can match Barack's ears! :nod:








:angel:

[tiger_rascal]

:nc:

[ConnieB]

I live in MI...15% voted for Clinton because they didn't know what uncommited meant in MI. So in reality, Obama would have won MI if you add those 15% to the other 40% who voted uncommited.

The only reason this is such a big issue is because Clinton needs the delegates now. If it had went the other way, she would not be pushing for this. Many around MI wants Obama as the DNC candidate and that has not changed in over 3 months.

I feel this primary was rigged as our governor is buddy buddy with the Clinton's. Granholm thought for sure Obama was going to take it in MI and didn't care about losing the delegates..... until Clinton won. Now they are fighting to get them placed. Sorry, the punishment has been handed out and they have to accept it and move on. If Clinton loses the nomination, you have MI's wonderful governor to thank for it.