if michigan and florida cant revote why not just split the delegates 50-50 and be done with it?

[ORDagnabbit]

[SharonRB]

1. Uh oh

:popcorn:

[ORDagnabbit]

2. They both signed this pledge...and it covers florida and michigan

THEREFORE, I (Hillary Clinton), Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules, pledge to actively campaign in the pre-approved early states Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina. I pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window (any date prior to February 5, 2008).

from http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/13/11136/3289/192/475758

[saracat]

3. Because it isn't fair to the voters? What about the Edwards voters? Didn't he get 16% in Florida?

And he didn't withdraw.he suspended. He isn't going to win of course but his voters need represntation.

[monmouth]

4. See, we're Democrats, and you're using logic and sound reasoning..

Some Dems just don't get the "Keep It Simple Stupid" and prefer the drama...

[On the Road]

5. I Think Mostly Because

it doesn't represent the intent of the voters. It's a complete wash. That's just as disenfranchising as excluding them.

The problem is that the current distribution is tainted. Since it's probably not enough to make a difference, Dean could decide to sit the Florida delegation with Clinton and Obama's blessing. But Michigan should either be revoted or excluded.

[cali]

6. because it would be unfair. duh.

Clinton won Florida in January and she'd win it today. Michigan is another story, and splitting it 50/50 seems like a fair solution.

[SharonRB]

8. As a Michigan voter and Obama supporter

I'd be happy with the 50/50 split, but I'm sure Hillary and her supporters would have a problem with that solution. I'm not sure it's the fairest way to go.

The 50/50 solution would be a wash, but might get Obama to the total he needs to win outright.

[HockeyMom]

9. Looks like it's going to be a mail in vote

from what I am hearing and reading. She may still win but it might be by a smaller number. There should be a lot more votes if people simply have to drop a ballot in their own mailboxes. It has also gotten a lot of publicity so people may be more fired up to vote this time. Who would that favor, do you think?

[SharonRB]

11. I don't think Barack wants the mail-in vote

because the way they would distribute the ballots would be a big issue. Who would get ballots? If it's only people who voted in the Dem primary, that could create a big problem. A lot of people stayed home because they were told their vote wouldn't count and a lot of people crossed over to mess with the Repukes for the same reason.

[skipos]

7. because Hillary is working hard to trick Michigan voters

1. MI voters are told their vote won't go towards delegates. Hillary is cool with it.
2. MI has our faux primary, many dems don't bother voting. Many candidates aren't on the ballot.
3. Clinton determines that it is in her own best political interest to try to squeeze delegates out of MI, and wants to tell the voters "Surprise! Despite what you were told, we are now going to give me delegates based on your primary!"

This MI voter says SCREW THAT.

[SharonRB]

10. And so does this one.

Although as I said above, if the only agreement they can reach is the 50/50 split, it's better than not getting seated. I just don't see Hillary accepting that. She thinks our vote was fair. Guess what, Hillary, IT WASN'T FAIR!

[skipos]

12. I agree.

A compromise would be nice. I don't know if Hillary is capable of compromise with her current mindset (destroy Obama at all costs).