Statement by Senator Hillary Clinton on the Seating of Delegates at the Democratic National Conventi

[rodeodance]

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject Statement by Senator Hillary Clinton on the Seating of Delegates at the Democratic National Conventi
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4195996#4195996
4195996, Statement by Senator Hillary Clinton on the Seating of Delegates at the Democratic National Conventi
Posted by William769 on Fri Jan-25-08 11:03 AM

Press release.

"I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee.


"I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan. I know not all of my delegates will do so and I fully respect that decision. But I hope to be President of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention.

"I hope my fellow potential nominees will join me in this.

"I will of course be following the no-campaigning pledge that I signed, and expect others will as well."

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5492

[rodeodance]

1. TPM Josh Marshal: NO WAY (Clinton camp needs to be shut down on this new gambit re MI/FL delegates)

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject TPM Josh Marshal: NO WAY (Clinton camp needs to be shut down on this new gambit re MI/FL delegates)
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4201571#4201571
4201571, TPM Josh Marshal: NO WAY (Clinton camp needs to be shut down on this new gambit re MI/FL delegates)
Posted by Pirate Smile on Fri Jan-25-08 04:48 PM

No Way

The Clinton camp really needs to be shut down on this new gambit of theirs to muscle the party and the other candidates into seating the Michigan and Florida delegate slates.

And let me be very clear about what I mean. It was very debatable decision whether the DNC should have punished Florida and Michigan with the loss of their delegates slates because they broke the rules the party had set down for scheduling their primaries. By 'debatable' I don't mean it was right or wrong, only that it was a pretty draconian move and I know there was a lot of discussion about whether or not it was the right thing to do.

But that was the decision -- one that each of the candidates at least implicitly agreed to. Indeed, each agreed not to campaign in either of these states, again implicitly agreeing to the decision not to seat the delegates.

The Clinton camp is just pushing to seat these delegates now because the contingencies of the moment mean that the decision would favor Hillary. She was the only one whose name was on the ballot in Michigan, thus insuring her win. She has a wide lead in every Florida poll taken this month.

Even that was a matter of her basically pulling a fast one on the other candidates by not taking her name off the ballot. Each of the major candidates signed a pledge not to "campaign or participate" in any primary or caucus prior to Feb. 5th except for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. The other major candidates adopted what seems like the only reasonable interpretation of the pledge (see text here) and pulled their names from the ballot.

But then Hillary didn't, thus in essence guaranteeing her win in Michigan.

The Clinton campaign said taking their name off the ballot wasn't required by the pledge. But what can "participate" mean over and above "campaigning" other than formally being a candidate in the race?

In any case, by gaming the process Clinton already insured her win in Michigan, though it seemed only for a symbolic victory, not real delegates.

But all these particulars are secondary to the principle, which is that you don't change the rules in midstream to favor one candidate or another. This is no more than a replay, with different factual particulars, of the attempt to outlaw the at-large caucuses in Nevada after the Culinary Union endorsement made it appear they would help Barack Obama.

Perhaps there's some detail of this question that I'm not aware of. And if there is I'll revise my opinion accordingly. But based on what I know now this is pretty clear-cut.

Hillary can muscle for every advantage she wants. Good for her. She's a fighter. But everyone else should see this for what it is and say No.

--Josh Marshall

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/064801.php

[rodeodance]

2. Hillary, YOU Don’t Get to Decide to Seat Our Delegates

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject Hillary, YOU Don’t Get to Decide to Seat Our Delegates
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4204265#4204265
4204265, Hillary, YOU Don’t Get to Decide to Seat Our Delegates
Posted by ProSense on Fri Jan-25-08 08:06 PM

Hillary, YOU Don’t Get to Decide to Seat Our Delegates
By: emptywheel Friday January 25, 2008 4:50 pm

This is probably going to get me kicked out of the MDP, but this is bullshit.

Statement by Senator Hillary Clinton on the Seating of Delegates at the Democratic National Convention
I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee.

I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan. I know not all of my delegates will do so and I fully respect that decision. But I hope to be President of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention.

I hope my fellow potential nominees will join me in this.

I will of course be following the no-campaigning pledge that I signed, and expect others will as well.

Its bullshit for a number of reasons. Hillary is pretending that this matter won't be decided, by the party, well before her delegates get to Denver. She's pretending the decision hasn't already been made that, once it becomes clear a candidate has the nomination, the DNC will announce that MI's and FL's delegates will be seated in Denver. And she's pretending that she can somehow give us voice in the nomination process, when MI's Clusterfuck has already guaranteed we will have no voice.

It's a shameless pander to Florida's voters, an incredibly dangerous move suggesting that Hillary might someday try to claim MI's and FL's delegates to contribute to her total, and it's a nasty cynical tactic that cheapens my vote.

OUR state gambled with the Clusterfuck and lost. That's an issue between us, our party leaders, and the DNC. But it is not your place, Hillary, to swoop in and make it better. And to suggest it is your place really, really, risks damaging the party.

Back during the Clusterfuck, I scoffed when people said Hillary would try to seat MI's delegates. Such a tactic would only be tried, I thought, by a reckless person who put herself above the larger good.

Apparently I was wrong. About Hillary, that is. Not about the recklessness of this.

[rodeodance]

3. MI and FL delegates will be seated. If Obama fights it, he will lose.

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject MI and FL delegates will be seated. If Obama fights it, he will lose.
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4204975#4204975
4204975, MI and FL delegates will be seated. If Obama fights it, he will lose.
Posted by joshcryer on Fri Jan-25-08 08:57 PM

And he will lose big time. The seating of these delegates will probably come at some cost, 1/3rd of all delegates become "undecided" or something like that (brokered). But to think that the DNC will not allow voters in a state to be represented because the state party (not the voters, the party in that state) decided to go against the DNC is completely assinine.