Shouldn't we have had a meeting like this BEFORE the Michigan and Florida primaries?

[Bicoastal]

Just askin'.

[AllentownJake]

1. We did

and they stripped them of their delegates.

[Orangepeel]

2. There were meetings. Just not on television. n/t

[Bicoastal]

3. EXACTLY.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

16. yes. The one thing that should change is televising original mts so rules won't be violated again

The Clinton campaign is taking advantage of the lack of public awareness of
what really went down.

This whole thing was part of her surrogates strategy.

[madame defarge]

4. Hillary was winning then so it didn't matter...to her.

[AtomicKitten]

8. exactly

:thumbsup:

[gateley]

5. Good point but there didn't seem to be a need at the time.

All the candidates agreed.

And if Clinton was so concerned about the voters then, she should have voiced it then. Hmmm. Why now and not then?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

6. The ultimate irony is this...

Had the FL and MI primaries been held LATER, those states would have received much more attention, perhaps being the decisive factors.

That's the irony!!

The name recognition and advantages that Hillary enjoyed during that time should have helped her more...

[iamjoy]

7. Yeah, That's Not Lost On Me (eom)

[BlooInBloo]

9. Yup. They should learn from the importance of NC, PA, and other later states....

Not being first is NOT the same thing as not being important.

[bluerum]

10. errr,,,,

[hedgehog]

11. Levin said something about New Hampshire getting a waiver, so there

must have been a process in place for that. Either Michigan and FLorida asked and were told no or else they just didn't ask. Either way, if they go unpunished today New Hampshire will never give up its place in line!

[MichiganVote]

12. NH got a waiver b/c of a state law that mandated a specific window

for their primary. They could have moved back a date or two but instead moved forward to the #2 spot-again. The Rules committee gave them a waiver even tho' technically they violated the "rules" too.

Michigan did apply for a waiver and were denied.

[hedgehog]

13. So MIchigan applied for a waiver, was told "No" and went right ahead.

On the other hand, maybe if we punish Michigan and Florida, we should take away New Hampshire's delegates, too...



:evilgrin:

[MichiganVote]

14. At this points its useless to speculate. 69-59, Levin's plan is reasonable.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

17. the problem is that now the rules will NEVER be respected, but McCauliffe in 04 enforced the rules

hipocrisy.

[iamjoy]

15. It Wasn't Supposed To Matter

It was all a big bluff on everyone's part. Florida bluffed that the DNC wouldn't really take all our delegates. They figured they'd get the money and attention from an early primary. The DNC called that bluff and the Four State Pledge upped the stakes. But see, the DNC was bluffing too. I don't think they ever really intended to shut us out of the convention. And here's where everyone was doing the same bluff.

Everyone figured that the nominee would be decided by Super Duper Tuesday. Then the nominee would, in a gesture of unity and goodwill, advocate for reinstating the delegates of the rogue states. Few would really object - that would just be mean spirited. The overwhelming consensus would be to reinstate the delegates - and it wouldn't really make a difference one way or the other. I mean, imagine if one of the candidates already had 2300 pledged delegates - the nomination is sewn up anyhow.

Well, fate (or whatever you want to call it) threw us all a curve ball. The nomination, while presumably Obama's, is by no means certain. If Clinton gets her way with Michigan and Florida, she only has to swing a few more SuperDelegates her way to be the nominee. And that's why it's such a mess.