What about Michigan and Florida?
April 26th 2008 09:21
The DNC will be meeting next month to decide what to do about Michigan and Florida. Will they redo the elections? Will they just split the delegates equally between Obama and Clinton? How many delegates will wind up being seated at the convention?
The DNC made a huge mistake when it opted to strip Michigan and Florida of all their delegates. In doing so, the DNC made those two elections meaningless. For a party that still complains to this day about the failure to "count every vote" in the 2000 presidential election, it seems heretical to disenfranchise the voters in the 4th and 8th most populous states in the country. They punished millions of voters because of the actions of a handful of state party officials.
Compounding the problem is the fact that the contest between Obama and Clinton is so close. Would those two states make a difference? Nobody knows for certain. Clearly, Florida would've been a very strong state for Clinton. Michigan could've gone to either of the two candidates, it seems. As Clinton tries to find a path to the nomination, you can be rest assured that she will push for a revote or, at the very least, make a case to the superdelegates that those two states would've put her over the top. Without a revote, though, we'll never know.
Michigan and Florida were punished by the DNC because they moved up their primaries in order to have more of an impact on the race. Ironically, a revote would give those two states EXACTLY what they wanted. They could possibly wind up being the two most important states in the primary process. Not only would a revote fail to punish them, it could reward them by making their primaries more important than the primaries or caucuses in any of the other states. This is the dilemma that the DNC is now facing.
So what should happen? Personally, I think they should have a revote. The right to vote is a precious right in the US. It's grossly unfair to punish all those voters because of the actions of a few state party leaders and a bad decision by the folks at the DNC. Perhaps the DNC could just reinstate half their delegates, though. Or maybe the DNC could put in place a deferred punishment by moving Michigan and Florida to the very end of the 2012 primary calendar. Either way, the voters of Michigan and Florida should have their chance to weigh in on this historic election. Furthermore, Obama and Clinton should not have their contest tarnished by the disenfranchisement of millions of voters.
I look forward to seeing what the DNC does at the meeting next month.
The DNC made a huge mistake when it opted to strip Michigan and Florida of all their delegates. In doing so, the DNC made those two elections meaningless. For a party that still complains to this day about the failure to "count every vote" in the 2000 presidential election, it seems heretical to disenfranchise the voters in the 4th and 8th most populous states in the country. They punished millions of voters because of the actions of a handful of state party officials.
Compounding the problem is the fact that the contest between Obama and Clinton is so close. Would those two states make a difference? Nobody knows for certain. Clearly, Florida would've been a very strong state for Clinton. Michigan could've gone to either of the two candidates, it seems. As Clinton tries to find a path to the nomination, you can be rest assured that she will push for a revote or, at the very least, make a case to the superdelegates that those two states would've put her over the top. Without a revote, though, we'll never know.
Michigan and Florida were punished by the DNC because they moved up their primaries in order to have more of an impact on the race. Ironically, a revote would give those two states EXACTLY what they wanted. They could possibly wind up being the two most important states in the primary process. Not only would a revote fail to punish them, it could reward them by making their primaries more important than the primaries or caucuses in any of the other states. This is the dilemma that the DNC is now facing.
So what should happen? Personally, I think they should have a revote. The right to vote is a precious right in the US. It's grossly unfair to punish all those voters because of the actions of a few state party leaders and a bad decision by the folks at the DNC. Perhaps the DNC could just reinstate half their delegates, though. Or maybe the DNC could put in place a deferred punishment by moving Michigan and Florida to the very end of the 2012 primary calendar. Either way, the voters of Michigan and Florida should have their chance to weigh in on this historic election. Furthermore, Obama and Clinton should not have their contest tarnished by the disenfranchisement of millions of voters.
I look forward to seeing what the DNC does at the meeting next month.
| 76 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
On a side note, remember the Holocaust denial "summit" that Ahmadinejad hosted awhile back? I know that Carter and David Duke were invited and I'm pretty sure that Carter and Duke both attended. Are your memories clearer than mine?
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate
According to Media Matters (IMO, a despicable organization), Glenn Beck said that Duke attended, but Carter did not:
Carter
Even if he didn't attend, though, Carter's antagonism towards Israel is well-known.
Personally, I would like more balance in our Israel-Palestine positions, but cozying up to terrorists and grossly mischaracterizing the situation is not the way to do that.
Comment by S.L. Bradish
It amazes me when people (non-Americans, especially) speak so well of Carter without knowing anything about what he's really like. Please, feel free to chime in when you see such a debate going on!