Hillary: Seat Michigan, Florida Delegates - "The only agreement I entered into was not to campaign"

[jefferson_dem]

This is a DUPE. Sorry.

Originally posted here -- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4712332&mesg_id=4712332

Friday, February 22, 2008
Hillary: Seat Michigan, Florida Delegates

posted by Evan Smith at 7:50 AM

I just finished a thirty-minute interview with Hillary Clinton -- it will air statewide next week, just before the Texas primary, on "Texas Monthly Talks" -- and among the topics we discussed was the controversy over whether the Michigan and Florida delegations should be seated at the Democratic National Convention. Remember that she won both states despite signing a pledge with the other Democratic candidates not to campaign there -- and remember too that, as a result, her name was the only name on the Michigan ballot. Here's is our exchange on the subject:

There’s been a lot of talk about what your campaign would do should it get to the convention. Would you commit today to honoring the agreement made earlier not to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations?

Let’s talk about the agreement. The only agreement I entered into was not to campaign in Michigan and Florida. It had nothing to do with not seating the delegates. I think that’s an important distinction. I did not campaign--

The press seems to have missed the distinction if that’s the case. The talk is that you agreed not to seat the delegation.

That’s not the case at all. I signed an agreement not to campaign in Michigan and Florida. Now, the DNC made the determination that they would not seat the delegates, but I was not party to that. I think it’s important for the DNC to ask itself, Is this really in the best interest of our eventual nominee? We do not want to be disenfranchising Michigan and Florida. We have to try to carry both of those states. I’d love to carry Texas, but it’s usually not in the electoral calculation for the Democratic nominee. Florida and Michigan are. Therefore, the people of those two states disregarded adamantly the DNC’s decision that they would not seat the delegates. They came out and voted. If they had been influenced by the DNC, despite the fact that there was very little campaigning, if any, they would have stayed home. But they wanted their voices heard. More than 2 million people came out. I mean, it was record turnout for a primary. Florida, in particular, is sensitive to being disenfranchised because of what happened to them in the last elections. I have said that I would ask my delegates to vote to seat.

So your intention is to press this issue?

Yes, it is. Yes, it is. It’s in large measure because both the voters and elected officials in Michigan and Florida feel so strongly about this. Senator Bill Nelson, of Florida, early on in the process actually sued because he thinks it’s absurd on its face that 1.7 million Democrats who eventually voted would basically be disregarded, and I agree with him about that.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/polldancing/2008/02/hillary-seat-michigan-florida-delegates.php

[Qutzupalotl]

1. Why not have a re-vote?

Knowing that it WILL count makes a difference in how the candidates campaign.

[sabbat hunter]

2. no it is not

the Democratic parties in both those states agreed to abide by the DNC rules and not move up their primary dates. Yet they did so anyhow.

Furthermore, HRC was the only one not to remove her name from the Michigan ballot, when all the other candidates (Except I think DK) abided by the party request and removed their names.

Who knows how the vote would have turned out if BO was on the ballot in Michigan, if he campaigned in both states and they had their primaries on their original dates.

So, no do not restore the delegates. Let the people of those states throw out their party leaders who screwed them over.

[MNDemNY]

6. Not the party leaders, the state legislators.

[Cronus Protagonist]

11. Your argument is to not count the votes

Or to not let the votes count. Where have I heard that before?

[sabbat hunter]

14. They were

unsanctioned elections. The votes do not count. The Democratic party leaders in the florida leg and in michigan broke the rules. They want to be represented at the DNC? Fine, schedule new votes and follow the rules. If you do not follow the rules what is the point of having them?

[Cronus Protagonist]

15. Nonetheless, you don't want Democratic votes counted, right?

I'm saying this is a losing argument no matter what your justifications are. The poeple who voted want their votes to count. The votes will be counted, I predict.

[sabbat hunter]

17. I predict

they will be forced to hold new votes


What was held already were little more than beauty contests.

Why should HRC be allowed to get the delegates from MI when she basically was unopposed? If BO, JE etc were on the ballot who knows how the election would have turned out. With Detroit's large black population I can bet that would have made a difference had he been on the ballot.

What about those that knew that these votes would not count and did not vote? why should they lose out?

[Cronus Protagonist]

25. I agree with that, but good luck on re-doing an election

A re-do will never happen, and even if it could, it will not happen in time, so the only option left is to count the votes of the intrepid voters whos voices will not be silenced. The other voters could have written in their candidates of choice, you know.

[sabbat hunter]

27. no they couldnt have

because you are voting for delegates not the actual candidate. so even if you cast a vote for a candidate, there is no delegate associated with that person, it is invalid.

[Cronus Protagonist]

30. NO, they could have

Because they were voting for a candidate. If there is no delegate assigned to that vote, well, that can and could have been easily fixed. The vote could have been recorded and counted.

[sabbat hunter]

32. well how about

in PA where in some districts HRC has no delegate on the slate? I believe that she does nto get any delegate from that district.


So it is not so easy as you claim.

[Cronus Protagonist]

33. They have a box on every ballot to write in a candidate

Surely you're not claiming that's not so. And since it is true, anyone could have voted for any candidate, including their next door neighbor. And it is that easy.

[sabbat hunter]

35. but there would be

no delegate associated with the vote.

[tabasco]

39. Maybe you should ask Jimmy Carter about fair elections.

Stalin had elections.

Just because people voted doesn't mean it was a fair election and results should matter.

I really find it hard to believe that H. Clinton supporters are getting this desperate. It is really scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to ethics.

[JackORoses]

29. why not have a revote? oh, that won't help Hillary? shucks

She needs those flawed delegations to win, dammit!

[Cronus Protagonist]

31. I say have a re-vote if you want.

And I doubt Hillary would say anything aganist a re-vote either. The problem is elections are costly and the local government may not be able to do another one. I"m all for a re-vote if it's possible, and I've never heard anyone advocate otherwise.

In any case, the votes cast should count. It's that simple.

[Skink]

12. The Texas Ballot lists the whole bunch of them.

You can vote for Kucinich if you want.

[MonkeyFunk]

20. Read the pledge

you seem ignorant of what it says.

And you're repeating an oft-debunked lie that Clinton was the only candidate not to remove her name from the MI ballot. Four candidates removed their names. Four names remained.

[yourguide]

37. Yes but 3 of the 4 front runners removed their names n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

40. So I was right

All the other candidates did not remove their names.

This is now the 12th time I've seen that lie spread here. I have to wonder if it comes from central source.

And if they chose to remove their names, why should the voters be punished for that?

[yourguide]

41. And if Hillary chose not to participate in party unity...

why should she benefit from it?

[DUyellow]

3. If florida is told it is not going to count, and some voters stay home... is it still a valid electi

election?

[ChiciB1]

10. The Stupid People Who Decided To Move The Primary Up ARE TO

BLAME! And once again, I, as A Floridian have to live with this crap!! NO, NO, and NO! I do not want to RE-VOTE! It's UNFAIR! Will ALL of the candidates still be on the ballot? And IF THEY ARE, will the people who voted for them IN THE FIRST PLACE still vote for them NOW?? NOW, that it's been DECIDED that we have ONLY two choices??

They screwed it up, like almost everything else... so even though I feel I DON'T count, I say NO!!!

I haven't counted for a very, very, very LONG TIME anyway!!!

[JackintheGreen]

13. Do NOT pretend that FL and MI primaries would have changed anything

Are we to believe that JE would still be a viable candidate if only MI and FL were allowed to vote. Please...

[MonkeyFunk]

21. If the turnout is twice is high as the last presidential primary,

yes.

[DUyellow]

44. That was because of the amendment, people who owned houses voted.

there is more to it.

[Spider Jerusalem]

4. Senator Clinton lies...

sorry, but she made a clear statement. When asked 'why not take your name off the ballot in Michigan?' her response was 'because those votes don't count anyway'.

[Cha]

43. And, she tells so many that

her web of deceit is going to rain hard down on her head. Ohhh, mixed metaphors.

[Submariner]

5. Hillary won Florida because her voting block

was not going to pass up the rare chance to GTF out of their assisted living facility. For the geriatric Floridian crowd, going to the polls is a social event where 90 year old singles hit on 80 year old singles.

The Obama crowd was home chillin' and cleaning their Birkenstock's.

[TwilightGardener]

7. Ridiculous. The rules--and the punishment-- were just fine with her

last summer, when she thought it wouldn't matter. Sorry, toots.

[Egnever]

8. Each time she plays this BS

My disgust with her grows.

[Radical Activist]

9. It depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

I am so freaking tired of their shit.

[Cronus Protagonist]

16. Straight out of the GOP playbook election 2000

Nice.

[EmilyAnne]

18. That's it. I'm done. I can't support her.

[OzarkDem]

19. These are two states she would have won

its not her fault their state Dem party leaders decided to screw with the system.

[sabbat hunter]

22. I dont know

if she would have won michigan

[demmiblue]

24. I agree

Although there was a movement to vote uncommited if you backed candidates that were not on the ballot, voter turnout was "light." Bottom line... democratic voters were told that their votes would not count. Whether or not Senator Clinton would have prevailed, I can't really say. That is the conundrum.

[Johnny__Motown]

45. No chance in hell she would have won Michigan,. 40% voted Uncommitted just to spite her

[rucky]

23. It certainly IS a "Dupe". n/t

[Alexander]

26. The issue is moot. She's so far behind that FL and MI won't help her.

[WonderGrunion]

38. Agreed

Even the 50% of the delegates she "won" in FL and MI won't help her at this point, just give them to her and then the hillbots can stop whining about it.

[Barack_America]

28. Hey Hillary, what's the meaning of "is"?

Just wondering.

[IndianaGreen]

34. Here is the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w68rOsJa74o

[HeraldSquare212]

36. I thought she was a Democrat.

Huh. Guess she doesn't consider herself bound by the democratic votes of the Democratic National Committee.

[AZBlue]

42. But I thought she did campaign there?

Am I missing something?