DNC Decision- response from the HillaryClinton.com website

DNC Overrules Michigan Election, Treats Florida Badly

"The following can also be found (in still longer version, if you can believe) on my blog, www.independentcaucus.com:

Yes, my guess is that the Michigan ruling won't stand. Hillary will likely still not get the nomination, but that ruling can't possibly hold up before the Credentials Committee at the convention in Denver if Hillary decides to challenge it.

There's simply nothing in the DNC charter - and with incredibly good reason - that allows for a committee, in this case, the Rules and Bylaws Committee (quite ironically, given its name) to transfer, purely on the basis of its own discretionary judgment, delegates from one candidate to another; that is, to allocate delegates in a manner different from the election outcome, especially when they acknowledge that there were no voting irregularities that made the election "flawed", and therefore requiring such discretionary adjustment, but most flawed was Obama's name not appearing on the ballot, something which was a discretionary decision by the Obama campaign, and nothing he was asked or told to do by the DNC. They are basically taking from Hillary and awarding to Obama based on a bad discretionary decision of the Obama campaign.

To me, it was also a bad ruling in the case of Florida to cut its delegates in half. This is a penalty which, under the rules, applies when states violate the DNC primary calendar. But that act is and was an act of the Florida state legislature, not the local Florida Democratic Party, and Republicans control that legislature by a huge margin, over 2 to 1, with a Republican governor. So the legislature passed the law moving up the date and the governor signed it. The law included a requirement that ballot machines provide a paper trail, which is a top DNC legislative priority, and for that reason, and because their constituents very much want this, nearly all Florida legislators voted for it, including the Democrats. Had Democrats voted against it, simply to avoid a possible delegate sanction for having jumped the DNC primary calendar, the price would have been their seats in the next election, and their proportion, already disproportionately small, in the Florida legislature, and with that, a diminution of Democratic power in that very key state.

Michigan has its reasons, too, of course, why they should be awarded 100% of their delegates, but it was a weaker case. Michigan state government is not controlled by Republicans. They basically felt cheated, because after years of trying to get the DNC to shake up the calendar so that Iowa and New Hampshire were not always one-two, the DNC finally passed a rule allowing for two caucus states to hold their elections in between Iowa and New Hampshire. New Hampshire didn't like this, of course, and their legislature voted to move up their date so that there wasn't room or time for two caucus elections in between Iowa and New Hampshire. They, too, would have, under the rules, lost one half of their delegates for this, but they applied to the Rules and Bylaws Committee for a waiver of the applicable rule. And the Rules and Bylaws Committee....granted it.

So they broke this long-standing promise, rule and years-long effort by the state of Michigan to insert a more diverse mix of states into the calendar in between Iowa and New Hampshire. It was for this reason, out of anger, and because no other avenues were available to them to continue their effort and their protest, that the state legislature voted to move up Michigan's primary date. They fully expected that if the Rules Committee could grant New Hampshire a waiver, they could grant Michigan one, too. But they were going to take their chances either way. But disregarding the election results and moving delegates from Hillary to Uncommitted is without any standing.

Florida and Michigan aren't just any two states. They are and have been for several presidential elections key swing states, which can and have before been the difference in the election. It is interesting, that the Democratic nominee's greatest liability to winning in November may not be any particular issue - Iraq, health care, the economy - but rather its own national committee."

by intilij at 6/1/2008 1:01:49 PM


Then, I also include this slightly paraphrased, nonetheless passionate sentiment:

We will NEVER SURRENDER!

'It's time for a Clinton VS Obama VS McCain General Election Ticket because We won't elect a thief of votes, nor anyone who violates voters rights!
The Uncommitted votes of 5 candidates does not equal Barack Obama gets them all! And no-one on any fancy committee, no pundits, or the media can spin this to make it "sound" right! The voters must be heard and given the right to vote 100% for who they want as their general election candidate for president of our DEMOCRACY! The blatant rearranging power-in-favor-of-elitism in front of everyone will not be allowed to continue to happen in America!'

by jcjcd at 6/1/2008 12:14:42 PM