As a Michigan Voter, Let Me Say This Loud & Clear --

[IdaBriggs]

Senator Clinton CAN BITE ME!!!

The Michigan Democratic Party decided to play games; granted, I get why -- our money is good, but for the past heaven knows how many years, by the time the Primary Voting gets to our state, we've got 'no say.' So, we broke the rules. I don't like it, but hey, it usually doesn't matter, so who cares?

We were 'punished' -- no one came to our state to campaign (except Kucinich, whose folks forgot to file the paperwork to get his name removed -- love him!). The folks I wanted to vote for at the time weren't even on the ballot. And we were told our delegates weren't going to be seated (altho realistically, I think everyone expected they would still be allowed to sit someplace and cheer for the cameras), and our party leaders thumbed their noses, and said "WHO CARES? At least we're making a principled stand for the fact we think this Primary Season thing isn't fair."

Except in this Primary Season, its been a fight to the finish, and every state has counted. I'm in the 'woo hoo yeah democracy!' camp, and while the mudslinging has been fierce, I think it has strengthened the Party. (Yes, its a minority view, and I'm not arguing about it.) The bottom line is I'll vote for anyone with a "D" after their name, but like I told the folks who called to fund raise me the other day, Junior is still in office/hasn't been impeached, and I don't give a rat's ass about the excuses, I think the Dems are just as vested in the corruption in Washington as the Repukes.

But back to Hillary (who hasn't joined the calls for impeachment, by the way) -- she didn't 'win' Michigan. Half of us didn't go the polls because we were being told NOT to waste our time. (Seriously.) We were told if we did a 'write in' for the candidate of our choice, IT WOULD BE IGNORED.

IGNORED. We were 'punished' and SHE WENT ALONG WITH IT, which means SHE DIDN'T STAND UP FOR ME OR MICHIGAN, DIDN'T CAMPAIGN HERE, and now she wants our votes?

The only thing Hillary 'won' in Michigan was the 'I'm here to vote about a school millage, and I'll be damned if I'll let anyone think I'm going to support a Republican, so I'll vote for the Democrat, even if it doesn't matter' vote. And she barely made 50% of those, because the rest of them were saying, "I'll vote for any D, but I'd prefer not to vote for Hillary, please!"

Let me repeat myself:

BITE ME!!!

[polichick]

1. Clinton just sounds like a spoiled petulant child at this point.

[indimuse]

2. AS A FL VOTER....OBAMA CAN F*CKING BITE ME and ...

the 2.6 million...minus 1 voters....who voted!








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




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=749-elAOBFE

[SeattleGirl]

3. Why? He had nothing to do with what Florida decided.

And to be fair, neither did Hilary.

Stop trying to pretend differently.

[indimuse]

10. He fought REVOTE...he campaign HERE! And held a press conference!!!!

That is "Barak-ing" the ROOLZ!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN1UU_wqVpY OBAMA IN FL..CFR AUG 2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6165dwv4-Os ******************BINGO OBAMA CAUGHT CAMPAIGNING IN FL**************************

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCfmXDBPvNY&feature=related ****************Barack Obama @ Florida A&M (FAMU)***********September 09,

200************************

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-kcOzcwiOM&NR=1 ****************Barack at FAMU August 24, 2007*********************

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee36wm3FeJU&feature=related **************** Barack Obama Rally, Tampa Florida

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLjxK88CiUc&feature=related

[Skwmom]

14. A revote would reward Florida for breaking the rules, would

make Fl play an elevated role in deciding the nominee, would be difficult to fairly carryout (considering the Republican Gov is cheering for Clinton and she has the Democratic establishment backing her).

Elevating the role FL would play would be UNFAIR to all the voters who played by the rules. Why shouldn't they get to revote now that the race is close?

[Turn CO Blue]

18. A revote would have cost millions and millions and FL refused

to pay for it, (1. you can thank Wasserman Schultz for that - see below) and I sure as hell don't think the DNC should have paid for it! THAT money is supposed to go to all of the states, you know, the other 49 states. Like, you know, Colorado.

You can petuantly, and obtusely say this is Obama's fault, or the DNC's fault -- but THE REAL REASON that there wasn't a revote is that it just COST TOO MUCH MONEY AND NOBODY WAS WILLING TO PAY FOR IT! And you fucking know it.




----------
1.
CNN updated 5:04 a.m. EDT, Tue March 18, 2008

No new primary for Florida Democrats


~snip~
Florida's Democrats had been weighing several options for a re-vote, including a possible mail-in primary to be held before the DNC's June 10 deadline.

"I'm glad that the party has reached the same conclusion that was reached by the congressional delegation a week ago," said U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Florida.

A supporter of Clinton, Wasserman Schultz had staunchly opposed a re-vote.

She said she would consider a proposal that would allow the full delegation to weigh in at the convention, but she wants each delegate to have only half a vote.

[cascadiance]

24. NO! Quit lying! It was Clinton that fought the proposed caucus revote!

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/03/07/clinton-says-no-to-a-caucus-do-over.html

At that point, this BEGGAR should not have been allowed to be a CHOOSER! A caucus was perhaps doable given the time and expense constraints. A primary was far more expensive and time consuming. Did Hillary's people step up to the bat and provide ALL of the funding needed for such an effort? NO! So why should everyone else be forced to do what she wants?

[Gore1FL]

Probably need to find a news sources other than You Tube

[flpoljunkie]

12. Guess you missed the part about 1 million FL voters who stayed home knowing it wouldn't count!

Don't they count? Florida was one of three states where more Republicans turned out to vote in the primaries in larger numbers than Democrats. The others were Mitt's Utah and McCain's Arizona. Of course Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Bill Nelson never mention this fact!

Talkingpointsmemo did a story about this yesterday...

Who's Disenfranchised?

05.31.08 -- 1:06AM

By Josh Marshall

As both campaigns prepare to make their case for what to do about Florida and Michigan before the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC), I wanted to focus your attention on an issue that has gotten too little attention.

The Clinton campaign argues that if the delegates from these non-sanctioned primaries are not seated hundreds of thousand of voters in Florida and Michigan will be disenfranchised.

The other side argues that it is wrong to change the rules under which the nomination process after the fact in order to advantage one candidate over another. The latter is an argument I agree with -- but there's no question it lacks the emotive impact of the disenfranchisement argument.

What doesn't get mentioned, however, is this: it was widely reported and understood in both Florida and Michigan that the results of these primaries would not be counted. And based on that knowledge, large numbers of voters in both states simply didn't participate.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/197852.php

Now, the question is how can we really know how many people didn't show up because they were told it wasn't a real election? There is of course no way to arrive at a direct answer, at least no practical one. But this post by Eric Kleefeld, which on a statistical analysis by Gregory P. Nini and Glenn Hurowitz, makes a very strong statistical case that as many as one million voters in Florida and probably more than a half million voters in Michigan did not vote who otherwise would have if they had not believed that the results would not be counted. Take a look.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/primaries.php

[Carolina]

13. misplaced rage, bite your fucking legislators

they're the ones who screwed you. Oh and while you're at it, bite Hillary's fat ass. She didn't give a shit about your fucking vote until she didn't wrap it up by Feb 5th. Such situational ethics!

[jazzjunkysue]

39. Applause. Misplaced rage. All true.

Throw the Florida legislators out who forced the illegal ballot.

[Skwmom]

15. An important PROPERTY TAX issue was on the ballot (which is why the

older Hillary voters flooded the polls). You act like the 2.6 million went to the polls just b/c there was a primary. Not true.

As a person who voted in Florida in 2000, I'm disgusted that anyone would compare the Florida 2000 vote to the Florida 2008 vote.

[Lerkfish]

23. two weeks from now, this should be a much happier place.

[EFerrari]

34. Wow! You've stopped pushing the Obama is a Black Panther thing!

'Way to go!

lol

[AllentownJake]

36. As a PA voter Florida can bite me

We waited our turn and our votes counted. If florida would have done it in March they would have been a very important state right after Ohio and Texas. You guys screwed up. Blame your leaders and move on.

[Douglas Carpenter]

4. thank you...geat post...The FACTS need to be told. People are being lied to

[MonkeyFunk]

5. Yes, she did win Michigan

and all the polls showed she would. The exit polls, asking who people would vote for if all the candidates on the ballot, showed Clinton still winning.

There's no reason to believe that Obama supporters didn't vote in greater numbers than Clinton voters. She won Michigan, she was always going to win Michigan - that's a large part of the reason the others removed their names.

And more of that Obama unity and hope: "Bite me!" I still don't understand what it is about Obama that makes his supporters so base and vile.

And btw, when did Obama join the calls for impeachment? Which other Senators have? Why is Clinton the only one to be criticized for it?

[Higher Standard]

8. She won a popularity contest

between herself a a couple of non-viable candidates. Exit polls are unreliable in this case due to the fact that Michigan voters already knew their votes wouldn't count, which skewed the results in an indeterminate way.

She was "always going to win Michigan"? And "that's a large part of the reason the others removed their names"? By that logic, Obama should have removed his name from the Kentucky and West Virginia ballots, then he could have claimed less legitimacy to her wins there. That argument doesn't hold water. And you know it.

[grantcart]

11. polls before a campagin = why bother having a campaign?

Right now Clinton has exactly 5% more support than Obama versus McCain. Following your logic Clinton should get 5%more delegates.

This is the pledge that Hillary signed


THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.



Both sides have jerks and both sides have people that have reached out for a united front to defeat McCain.


Your statement

I still don't understand what it is about Obama that makes his supporters so base and vile.

clearly indicates which of those groups you have placed yourself in.

[Skwmom]

16. Clinton has NAME RECOGNITION. Who knows what would have been the end result if

Obama would have actually campaigned there.

Another reference to unity. The latest talking point - let's talk about unity, do everything we can to make sure there is no unity, then blame it on Obama. The Clinton hack from PA has been saying that the Democrats don't deserve to win if they can't unite.

This is about 2012.

[IdaBriggs]

25. Obama and the rest WEREN'T ON THE BALLOT.

Keep pretending it doesn't matter, but it did, especially when we (Michigan voters) were told 'write-ins' would be ignored.

I'm not an Obama supporter -- I'll support whoever the candidate is (which looks like it will be Obama) -- which means I'm just 'base and vile' because I don't like what Hillary is trying to do. My comments are addressed to Hillary saying that all of sudden Michigan should count, when she wouldn't support the state when our political leadership was being stupid/messing with the primaries.

Everyone removed their name to try and pressure Michigan to 'play by the rules.' Its what her press release said at the time, so your 'inferences' are thinly veiled lies.

Obama hasn't joined the calls for impeachment, either, which is one of the reasons I can comfortably say while I think any D is better than an R, I cynically think they are all a bunch of corrupt scoundrels.

[newmajority]

38. And Saddam Hussein won Iraq

99% of the popular vote, in his last election.

So why would Hillary Clinton enable George Bush to overturn (yet again) the results of an election?

[boobooday]

6. I'm in Florida

She can bite me too.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. Please educate me on something that I totally missed...1) What

is Hillary's excuse for not taking her name off the ballot -- or why was it on and no one else?
and 2) Was there any uproar by Dems when the whole thing began and at the point you knew you
wouldn't be seated -- or was it like you said, it usually doesn't matter anyway?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Most of us just rant on about things we have no clear
vested interest in !

[grantcart]

9. this is her pledge - will not "campaign or participate"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.


She went on NPR and said that she didn't have to take her name off the ballot because "the elections are not going to mean anything anyway" that is the remark that is played over and over again.



The reason that they didn't take their name off the ballot in Florida is that they don't have the power to do so. In Florida that is determined by the Secretary of State and by law they are required to include any name of any candidate, decleared or not, that has a viable possibility of getting the nomination.

[sellitman]

21. You are confusing Hillary supporters with facts.

Facts that shows their candidate wants to CHEAT.

I doubt they will reply.

[IdaBriggs]

26. She said it wouldn't matter anyway (but the translation was

somebody in her campaign screwed up, al Kucinich).

The party has been in an uproar for a while, with much eye rolling/head shaking, but honestly, it didn't really seem like it would matter. Who knew the primary season would happen like its been happening? And who listens to the rank and file, anyway? This was a decision made by the upper echelon, and I have heard several different versions of 'why.' The one that makes the most sense is 'principal of the thing because its not like anyone cares about us and our problems unless they want our check.'

Our economy is hurting fierce; we've got foreclosures like crazy, and people are fleeing the state for jobs. The number one problem we face is HEALTH CARE because its the single biggest expense on our number one industry -- automotive.

But who pays attention to issues like that? :shrug:

:mad:

[indimuse]

17. snipity snip!

Among the myths surrounding the Democratic fight over seating delegates from Florida and Michigan, one that stands out is a persistent inference that Barack Obama was somehow involuntarily kept off the Michigan primary ballot.

Obama chose to have his name erased from the Michigan ballot -- a decision that now presents one of the thorniest issues for the Democratic National Committee's rules panel meeting on Saturday to hear arguments in this dispute.

How can delegates be awarded to someone who was not even on the ballot? In sports, that would be like giving points to a team that forfeits the game.

The Obama camp signaled on Wednesday that the Democratic frontrunner is willing to concede some Florida and Michigan delegates to Hillary Rodham Clinton, but questions such as what to do about Obama's Michigan forfeit still hang.

It was the Illinois senator's written and personally signed request to the Michigan Secretary of State's office on Oct. 8, 2007, that prompted his exclusion. Obama's choice to stay off the ballot was a conscious political maneuver designed to please Iowa Democrats angered by Michigan's early primary date.

Clinton, to her detriment in Iowa, chose to stay on Michigan's ballot. As strange as some of Clinton's demands might seem to be in this matter, it would be truly bizarre to give any Michigan delegates to a candidate who voluntarily took his name off the ballot.



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

[Higher Standard]

22. Your argument is flawed

As was explained by a number of the candidates who had their names removed, the pledge they all signed was not to campaign or participate in the primary process in Michigan and Florida. Having one's name on the ballot is, by definition, participating. They had it within their power to remove their names from the Michigan ballot, but were unable to in Florida. But you know this, so it's weird that you keep arguing as though you're oblivious to it. Michigan was in no way a "forfeit" for any of the candidates who removed their names.

[EFerrari]

35. Right! So, Obama wins Iowa and will be awarded delegates in MI.

I want that smart person to be my president because he can run circles around your "gal" in his sleep.

lol

[Turn CO Blue]

19. It's just this simple:

By ENFRANCHISING the voters who voted for Senator Clinton, the DNC would be DISENFRANCHISING all the voters who had no choices, including those who voted "uncommitted" or those who stayed home merely because they had no choices.

[TahitiNut]

30. They'd be retroactively committing election fraud. Period.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6159157

[JustAnotherGen]

20. IdaBriggs

Thanks so much for your insight. I'm generally a 'rules are rules' person. But I don't want to see anyone disenfranchised. Which then means . . . what happens to the folks (people in MI) that DID stay home that day because the Democratic party in Michigan broke the rules and they assumed their vote wouldn't count anyways?

Sure, we could hold a Special Election in MI and FL . . . but who foots the bill? MI is hurting right now. Should those taxpayers be expected to take the hit? Should the Democratic Party? What does that do to our November War Chest?

No easy answers here. But at the end of the day, I wish Florida and Michigan had followed the rules. I'm actually very worried about Florida - because not having a consensus there I fear will leave us weak and ripe for more voter fraud this time at the hands of Governor Charlie.

[IdaBriggs]

29. We got bent over good and proper. Sigh.

I used another word, which I've edited out! LOL!

I think once the primary ends, our delegates will still be allowed to wave / cheer our candidates. Hopefully we took one for the team, and the rebellion will help folks to come up with a fairer (?) primary thing. New Hampshire and Iowa are great states, but there are 48 other ones that also deserve some quality 'primary season' love! Maybe they could rotate the order, or something -- who knows?

Ain't politics grand? LOL!

[TahitiNut]

32. Remember, we already footed the bill for an invalid primary election.

It's insult on top of injury on top of insult.

:grr:

[TahitiNut]

27. As another Michigan voter, I agree. And I said so ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6159157

[AtomicKitten]

28. Ditto.

:thumbsup:

[KAZ]

31. Ida rocks! K&R

[tokenlib]

33. They need to resolve this today--damn the Clintons and Wolfson for wanting to drag this to the conv.

Agree with your post as a fellow Michigander...

I've been swearing at the tube and Wolfson... All this talk of leaving loose ends until the convention. Michigan's primary was invalid--compromise and be done with it. What a bunch of assholes-- All this talk of resolving Florida but leaving Michigan to the credentials committee. They can all go fuck themselves....if this is not resolved today.

Do we want to beat McCain or not???

[Garbo 2004]

37. When California finally got tired of having a June primary it was moved without breaking the rules.

California didn't insist on primacy as the most populous state and a huge fundraising pot for the party/Dem candidates. It just moved up the primary and played by the rules.

IIRC, when CA still had a June primary, both Florida and Michigan held their primaries months ahead of CA. MI and FL thus had more impact in the primary season than CA. MI and FL (the state parties/pols) didn't complain about that then.

The state parties/pols in those states knowingly screwed their voters just to joust with the national party. They didn't have to.

[dchill]

40. K&R