Political Punch

What is important to America and all of the people in all of the states who have the constitutional right to vote is to UPHOLD THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION. It is common knowledge that the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA takes precedence over the constitution of any political party.
Florida and Michigan cannot for any unconstitutional reason be DISENFRANCHISED.
If for one reason or another someone made a wrong decision at PARTY LEVEL and there is now confusion and debate AT CONSTITUTIONAL LEVEL about the pros and cons about Florida and Michigan voting in the primaries too early or too soon. FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN need to vote for their party choice of their best candidate for the highest office in the land and the right CONSTITUTIONAL approach to the FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN situation will guide AMERICAN'S to vote for the RIGHT PERSON to be the next PRESIDENT OF AMERICA.

The Book of Judges chapters 4 and 5 in the Old Testament Holy Bible, speak of BARAK (a valiant man) and DEBORAH (a prophetess, a righteous woman) that were raised and used by GOD to deliver Israel against overwhelming odds in a time when there was great sin by the people of Israel.
BARAK is a name of HEBREW ORIGIN and means "FLASH OF LIGHTENING".
DEBORAH and BARAK worked together.( see chapters 4 and 5 in the Book of Judges).Errol Smythe.

Julian Bond's (and Mary Frances Henderson and Wade Berry) public outcry on behalf of disenfranchised voters is a day late and a dollar short. Why now? Moreover, if Henderson and Berry assisted in writing the letter to the DNC together with Mr. Bond, why did they not sign it with him? Why hide in the shadows if this is indeed a sincere effort to bring about justice and equality for Florida and Michigan voters? Why did these three individuals feel it necessary to come out without the full knowledge, and more importantly, the full support, of the NAACP Board and the organizations that they head. Doing so surely would have had a greater impact and, were it done in a timely manner when the battle was at hand.

Quite frankly, Mr. Bond's public outcry on behalf of all the disenfranchised voters is so far after the battle, it is disingenuous and embarrassing, at best.

This is exactly the kind of politics that folks all across America are demanding a departure from. This is why one hears over and over again, "We Want Change! Change that We Can Believe In!"

Further, this begs the question: If Florida and Michigan voters were allowed to go first, would their voters -- the people not the party leaders -- be any better off than if they stuck with the party rules? What is in it for the people -- the orange grove pickers, the working folks, the service industry employees, the school bus drivers, the firemen, the policemen, the garbage collectors, the teachers? What do they get out of all of this? Is this going to increase their wages, improve their living conditions and provide them with decent health care? No. It is just politics as usual.

As for Hillary Clinton -- first we had hanging chads, now we have illegal delegate gathering. Sen. Clinton's statement saying that she was going to do everything she can to get Florida and Michigan delegates seated -- but without a new primary -- speaks well of her campaign tactics to date.

DNC Chairman Dean's offer of a new primary is, under these circumstances, fair and equitable. If Sen. Clinton is so concerned with the people being disenfranchised, she would have jumped at this opportunity. Instead, she wrongfully claims that she won these two contests. What contests? In the case of Michigan, we all know that she was the only candidate on the ballot -- that's not a contest, that's stealing delegates. It is obvious that Sen. Clinton is not in tune with the people she so desperately is trying to become Commander in Chief of. People want change from this kind of politics.

There is an old saying that if you want to know the true nature of a person, watch what they do when faced with seemingly insurmountable obstacles. To date, when faced with seemingly insurmountable obstacles, Sen. Clinton has either cried or stretched the truth into something that is not recognizable as anything of truth or value.

This is exactly why people all across this nation are voting for change that they can believe in. I am confident that given the opportunity, the people of Florida and Michigan will also vote for change that they too can believe in -- and not just on a national level.

Obama basically wants to disenfranchise Florida's and Michigan's voters and delegates. The DNC in those states broke a rule and the party judged by giving the voters and delegates the death penalty basically stripping them of their rights and voices in this all important primary. The voters still went to the polls in record number and voted anyway, and that says alot about them. Obama should be for re-instating these votes or at least for a month of campaigning and a new polling date. Democrats do not stand for disenfranchising voters and taking away their rights to vote and for their votes to COUNT. I think it is quite obvious why Obama is against it, because he knows they all voted for Hillary. Obama is a hypocrite and self serving, honest question, if they were all black voters voting for him what do you think he would have to say about it then? As a life long Democrat, I will NEVER vote for this guy, he is a liar, a hypocrite and a charlatan.

Hillary All the Way.

None of the Super Delegates should vote for Obama, he is out to get them all fired, even the Clintons who are among the top tier of successful Democrats in the party's history. I think the fact Obama wants Florida and Michigan voters to be disenfranchised, to discount their votes is quite obvious, because he lost both states to Hillary. Florida and Michigan voters should demand to be counted and their delegates seated at the convention in this all important primary. Why should the voters be punished for what the DNC in their states did? The DNC has sentenced the voters to the death penalty over a simple rule, that is just wrong. I think the solution to be totally fair to the voters and candidates alike is to let the candidates campaign for one month in the two states and then do another vote. That is what democracy is all about, that is what the Democratic Party is supposed to stand for. Even the Republicans weren't this harsh on their voters, delegates and candidates!

Hillary All the Way!!!!!

Both the Florida and Michigan votes should count. Why did Obama pull his name of the Michigan ballot knowing at the end of the day the delegates wouldn't count. Obviously he knew Hillary was going to take that state and was advised to do this in order to have a case if he lost it. You people also fail to recognise that Obama cheated in the Florida primary. All candidates were asked not to campaign in Florida, but still Obama did. What was his intention for campaigning there if he knew the delegates there weren't going to count? I believe every single American vote is important, thus my reason for supporting Hillary's stands on this issue

I was a Clinton supporter, but these low campaign tactics are really getting to me. The fact of the matter is, with the proportional delegate count, Clinton will not receive significantly more delegates than Obama-certainly not enough to take over his lead in pledged delegates. Additionally, if you take into account both Michigan (where Obama's name was not on the ballot) and Florida, he will still maintain a lead in popular vote. It's about principles, and theses tactics are showing her lack thereof.

Votes must be counted if they will make a DIFFERENCE of outcome. Obama pull off his name off Michigan, yet did not pull it off Florida, just like hes "present" votes, he wants to play it both way.

Had Hillary lost in Michigan/Florida you wouldn't be hearing a peep about the "great concern at the prospect that million of voters in Michigan and Florida could ultimately have their votes completely discounted."

I don't see how one can agree to something and then want to go back on it.

For all the people saying: 'count every vote', if the situation was reversed, I can guarantee you Hillary would NOT want those delegates seated and many of you wouldn't either.

The simple fact of the matter is this: people cannot blame the Republican controlled legislature down there. The REST of the country knew what was going to happen last year. So, the people of Florida and Michigan must have known as well. Why didn't ANY OF THEM STAND UP and PROTEST THEN? The PEOPLE have a voice and they should have used it THEN, now is to late.

Where were the citizens of these states last year? Where were the civil rights leaders last year? If they would have had a massive amount of people STANDING UP and on their a--es crying foul, both the Republican legislature and the DNC would have come up with solutions to the problem then. But, now is to late. However, it has been reported that Dean offered a re-do of Florida but the Clinton camp said no.

Again though, how can one agree to something and then want to go back on it? And how can people think it is ok to do so? This is akin to signing a lease agreement or any contract, if you break the lease or don't pay your rent, there will be consequences. And you better believe they won't be favorable consequences.......

Is it fair that the people suffer those consequences? They should if they didn't say anything then.

Posted by: bobby,
I doesn't matter which party is in control. The PEOPLE of ANY state have a voice. The PEOPLE themselves should have stood up and said NO. People can't blame their lack of action on the Republicans. What-ever happened to taking responsibility? The people that are now complaining (citizens, Hillary camp, civil rights people, etc.) should have complained THEN, it's far to late for crying foul.

I wish they'd go ahead and give her the delegates. I'm sick of hearing about them. And, I bet if she gets awarded the delegates it will only increase his level of support. In other words, she better be careful what she wish for.

There are still many of us out here that would be happy with either of them. But, when one pulls a power move such as this, we take notice. We have to take notice because it makes us wonder what an administration with such a person would be like.
When I go and vote next month, this will be floating around in the back of my mind.

It's total BS to compare this to GWB's win in Florida. We foolishly elected him President, fair and square.

The Michigan votes must be ignored, since Clinton was the only one on the ballot. Shrewd move by Obama if Clinton was going to win anyway and he pulled his name off the ballot...

As for Florida, Sharpton's argument makes sense. They needed to make this argument (more forcefully) PRIOR to the vote. It's too late, now.

If Obama wins the presidency, I hope he's ready (and that there's no hidden agenda). We'd be electing him on far slimmer evidence than we elected GWB, and we know how THAT turned out.

McCain is a mixed bag, but at least we know what we're getting, and he (almost always) tells the truth, even when it's not in his interests to be truthful (like giving hard news). McCain is likely to work with both parties, and do what's in America's best interests.

Obama is pretty much a total mystery. He seems like a nice guy, but there's not much behind the rhetoric. He doesn't lay out a policy or say what he's going to do. He just derides those who participate in politics that he eschews (which is hypocritical, when you think about it). Obama is pretty left leaning, and sticks to the liberal side of things, or refrains from voting in certain cases. (What is THAT about?!?)

Clinton, we know what we're getting, and it's not that good. It's more of the same -- divisive, party politics; zero-sum game.

As much as I'd like to see a President who happens to be a women or non-white, I'm still thinking McCain is our best bet.

Mr. Bond is correct. Seat the delegates.
We are talking about the disenfranchisement of nearly 3 MILLION voters who DID go out to vote even knowing their votes may not be counted. Howard Dean really is to blame for this mess, but so are the Dem leaders because they had to put him someplace and figured he wouldn't cause much trouble there. Oh, well!
As for who was on the ballot. Sen Obama originally put his name on the Michigan ballot, then withdrew it. He left it on the ballot in Florida and ran campaign ads,Hillary went down for a fund raiser, and after the election went down to thank the voters for voting. As for Edwards, his percentage of the vote would probably been the same as it had been, still giving the majority of the votes as they were.
I'm a 70 yr old South Carolinian, and I called the DNC both before the Florida primary and after. I was spoken to very rudely and told, quote"we can't have the states running around willy nilly setting their own primaries!" unquote. I asked about the rights of the voters to be represented and was told that the DNC ran things and it was just too bad.
Rather distasteful attitude, don't you think?
As far as Rev Sharpton is concerned, with his history in civil rights--since when was he so concerned about rules? Mr. Bond is correct, the voters should be represented. It is "we the people"!
And if Mr. Sharpton cares about civil rights--he would be for the civil rights of 3 million people of ALL backgrounds. His current attitude smacks greatly of the very thing he professes to be working so hard against-discrimination against ANY of us.
THREE MILLION VOTERS DESERVE REPRESENTATION! I certainly want MY vote to count, even if it is only one. And a do-over is not an option. Surely intelligent,civilizwd people can come to some agreement.

you have to count florida. they have a republican controlled congress, who moved the dates. this is almost like a setup by the republicans so the democrats wouldn't be allowed to vote. these votes need to be counted.

I think it fair for the Michigan not to be counted, but the Florida vote definitely should be counted. While it's true Obama did not campaign in Florida, nor did Clinton, and both of their names are on the ballot, it may be true many supporters of Obama did not cast a vote thinking the vote will not be counted, same thing can be said of Clinton supporters, so they are really on equal footing.

So why didn't Obama pull his name off the ballot in Florida like he did in Michigan? I'm sure he would be fighting for the vote to be counted if he had won Florida. You can not have it both way.

Bad news for those thinking this has any place in the courts. You have a right to vote, but you don't have a right to a party selection process.

Florida and Michigan parties CHOSE to have their votes before the date of a valid election. So that would be the same as me showing up at my polling place a week before the election and screaming "Ive been DISENFRANCHISED!" because no one was there to take my vote.

Can't the Democraps do anything right?
Or are they getting nervous about Obama.
Giving Hillary the delegates from Floria & Michigan will "give" her the lead.
This election is reminding me of ....
GWB.
Win anyway you can, even if you have to cheat.

I agree, the time to come out was last year. Now is not the time for protesting. Everyone can see this for what it is, a vote for Hillary. I don't have a problem with these so-called civil rights leaders and black ministers supporting the person of his/her choice. But, I take great offense to someone making it sound like they give a dam- about the disenfranchisement of the voter. If he or they cared, they would have done something a long time ago. I said the same thing Sharpton said, if anyone is disenfranchised, it is the non-voter who didn't vote b/c he/she didn't think their vote would count.

Again, it is to little to late for protesting. Now is the time for solutions. Others have written the DNC to encourage a quick resolve of the problem as well. The difference is they didn't say "how" the problem should be resolved. So, I think it is clear Bond’s affiliation and intent. These so-called “leaders”, and I use the term loosely, have out lived their usefullness in every possible way.....

I agree with Rev Sharpton because these people are only concerned about the people who did vote, because their candidate was on the ballot.
After these people had this huge rally with thousands of people and all of the top Black Congress in that district, setting up this event.

Hillary shows up at the airport as media shows her with two people greeting her as if she is unaware, there is a huge celebration already in play, yet hundreds and thousands of people did not even go to the polls because they were told Senator Obama was not on the ticket and that they could not write his name in. Roll the tapes folks, it was all over CNN and all the rest of big bad media.

These same people who have promoted this woman as the front runner sense the beginning of this campaign because she is the only Democratic candidate Republicans can and will beat.

I don't know what the hell Bonds is talking about and I think he may not have all the facts, because I am sure that he would not want to disenfranchise one group in favor of another especially when he has the responsibility of looking out for everyone that would be effected by this mess..

He is wrong and I hope that Howard Dean does not attempt to use that information to go ahead and disrespect those that did not get the opportunity.He will be dealing with a real back lash if he does and I hope he knows that.

Senator Obama is far too important to all of the people in this country that have stood behind him at this stage of the game and he will not be dealing with just the people of Florida, but people everywhere.

Many commentators here seem to miss the point. To cast an intelligent vote, you must have the opportunity to hear detailed plans from all contenders. You cannot decide in such an important election based on one TV ad or by just going for a familiar name. Voters in both states were unfortunately disenfranchised because of the bad decisions made by the state party leaders. Those persons who went out and cast their votes knowing that they would mean nothing, well that is fine for you. However, many of us in Michigan simply did not participate because we knew the rules - the votes would not count. We felt marginalized and upset ad we have envied our neighbors Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio etc. To go back now and say we SHOULD have voted because the votes suddenly count is just plain wrong. Most people in MI as elsewhere did not know anything much about Mr. Obama's policies in January and his name was not even on the ballot. In fact, we were being asked to go out and vote for Mitt Romney in order to mess up the Republican slate! So the only solution now is a do over. Julian Bond knows this. These old civil rights leaders are really acting up simply because they owe so much to Bill Clinton. Mr. Bond now can join Andrew Young and Charlie Rangel in competing to see who has said the suupidest things in this campaign as they fall over one another to prove their loyalty to the Clintons. LOL if it was not such a mess.

Is Florida a 'winner take all" state?
Obama looks like the clear choice of our party so lets back him and move on.

The Clintons are a sorry old pair building a bridge to their retirement. We don't need more divisive figures like bush and Clinton right now.

Obama ran a national ad that was seen in every state, he could not exclude Florida. These were the rules they all agreed upon, she campaigned there she just side stepped the rules by making it a fundraising event. You Hillary supporters are sounding more and more bitter, I swear you complain that young people are not involved in politics, then piss and moan when we do get involved.

Will Hilary lose the popular vote and steal the election with a grab for unelected delegates? Will she try to seat delegates from Michigan and Florida, in spite of agreeing to the rules up front that those delegates would not be seated? Hilary Clinton as the great uniter? Oh,good grief. She is already splitting the Democratic Party. How much better will she fare in the general election against Republicans who already don't like her? Hilary does have experience. She has a lot of experience stirring people up. She did it in the past, she's doing it now, and she'll be doing it on Day One. After eight years of Republican misery, it looks like we might be in for at least four more years of Democratic misery. When does it end?

jo

Timing is everything, I agree with Al Sharpton. Had either Hillary Clinton or Julian Bond taken a firm stance against the DNC's decision to "disenfranchise" the voters of Michigan and Florida BEFORE it was deemed politically expedient for Sen. Clinton to lobby for their representation at the Convention?

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Early in this race, Democratic candidates Clinton, Obama, and Edwards agreed to support the DNC's position to penalize both states for setting early primary dates. Ultimately, Democrats agreed that there would be no campaigning in either state. Therefore, no delegates would be awarded.

However, consider this, if you will.... If Hillary makes a public commitment to support her party's position on this issue, and then blatantly attempts to defy these very same rules in the interest of self-preservation, will she truly be regarded as a woman of conviction?? If elected, will she turn on the American people on "Day One" as handily as she appears to have turned on her own party?? Will she say one thing, then do another??

Trust is a critical factor in casting my vote. Can someone help me out here????

I can't beleive I agree with Sharpton. The only reason people and crying out and crying foul on behalf of Florida & Michigan, is because the way the race has shaped up. The correct time to protest was at the time of the decision. To do so now, is literally changing the rules in the midst of the game. If you know the rules before hand you can plan accordingly. It would be just shy of cheating & it wouldn't past the smell test to many people.

I hope the Michigan and Fla dlegates and the citizens of these states, take this matter to the supreme court.

This is a completely unfair to the voters of these states.

It's the right of american people to have every vote counted as stated in the Constitution.

I don't think Dean and the DNC should disenfranchise these voters that are needed in a national election.

And for Obama pulled his name off the ballot in Michigan and ran ads in FLA. Why did he not get critisim for running ads and fundraisers in the state. Personally I think they need to suspend some of his delegates then for this tactic.

The same rules that said no state other than the first four can schedule a primary or caucus before February 5th also said that Iowa was scheduled for no earlier than January 14, Nevada January 19, New Hampshire January 22, and South Carolina January 29. Of those four, only Nevada followed the schedule set by the DNC. Yet no one's calling for IA, NH and SC to be stripped of delegates for breaking rule 11A. Also, the sanction for violating that rule was supposed to a 50% reduction in delegates and alternates, not the 100% loss Michigan received. So it seems to me that the DNC has had no problem changing the rules mid-stream in the months leading up to this disaster. Why should they have any qualms about changing their minds again?

Sharpton is correct. As someone else said, this is like deciding to go back and count pre-season baseball games towards the championship.

The Florida vote should count. Both Clinton and Obama were on the ballot there.

Florida voters should not be denied because of some silly bickering with the DNC.

Michigan should not count because Obama was not on the ballot.

Michigan should have another primary.

Al Sharpton doesn't know diddley.

I don't care what he has to say.

Not only did Obama not campaign there, he had no offices or volunteers working there. In Michigan his name wasnt even on the ballot. This is a shameless move by the Clintons. In my opinion the people have spoken. He won 80 to 20 in Idaho, he won 75 to 25 in DC. White states, black states he's winning by big margins. If the DNC tries to find ways to override the will of the people in favor of the establishment candidate the Democratic party will fail. Its strange because with Obama the dems have a very rare opportunity to expand the party and win in November. With Hillary they will only destroy the party and ensure Republican victory.

As a Michigan voter my anger was toward the Michigan Democratic leaders, who decided without the input of voters to change the primary date, knowing what the consequences were. If Julian Bond, Hilary Clinton or anyone else disagreed with the DNC,the time to complain was 3 or 4 months ago, not now. You can't change the rules mid game to benefit either candidate.

Chmn. Dean's decision to disenfranchise the Michigan and Florida Dems is going to return to bite him in the back of his lap, especially if the delegate count between Sens. Clinton and Obama is this/close. It won't be pretty, either!

You all are willfully disregarding the facts. The agreement was NOT let's not campaign in Florida and then see how it all turns out and then decide whether or not to apportion delegates. the agreement was let's not campaign in Florida BECAUSE the DNC has decided that by virtue of breaking the rules they WILL NOT GET DELEGATES.
You want to change the rules moving forward? Fine.
You think Florida should hold another primary? Fine.
Do some research and figure out the financial differences in running a primary and a caucus.
This is why the idea of caucus re do's are being floated, because there is no way Florida will pony up for another primary.
Please face the facts.

Who cares what Al Sharpton has to say, he is an idiot.

The republican controlled congress of Florida changed the state's primary to Jan. Then the Democratic Committee stripped the state of it's delegates. That doesn't seem fair to me.

1 million people voted.
All candidates were on the ballots.
It was 6 days before Super-Tuesday.

They should be counted - not punished.

Michigan is another story. They should re-do their primary if they want to be counted as Obama removed his name.

Brandon - when since is the DNC God? The DNC has made BAD decisions in the past and that's why we got stuck with "W". Their decision to not count Florida's votes is another BAD decision. And we'll end up with President John McCain come January. And who's the one cheating? The candidates? Please. Again, everyones name was on the Florida primary ballot and it was a FAIR vot. Hillary won, without campaigning, Obama lost without campaigning. ENOUGH already!

Brandon, what about the voters' voices in these states? Do they not count? I mean, in FLA, they knew it didn't count, yet, they voted anyway. Is this a democracy or not? Do we count the votes of the people, or not?
It's a mess, I grant you, the DNC, and the legislatures in these states screwed up.. but should the voters pay for their mistakes? Just so you can get the outcome you want? In such a close election? And if these votes could put Clinton over the top and they are silenced.. do you think Obama has a prayer in the general in these states? Isn't that an issue you are worried about?
I hope it doesn't come to this, and one of them wins regardless of these votes, but I think the possiblity that FLA and MI could be the tiebreakers, is increasingly possible.

The DNC was wrong to strip these states of their delegates. Howard Dean was flexing his muscles. If you read NAACP Chair Julian Bond's statement, he makes the point that the Republican leaders in Florida were the ones that changed the date, not the democratic party or the voters in Florida. Now what can Floridians do about that? What would you do if it happened in your state. Howard Dean should step down as chair of the DNC because he obviously doesn't know what the word "democratic" means...perhaps the "D" in DNC stands for "dictatorial". And the Republican National Committee punished these two states as well but they didn't strip them of all of their delegates, only some of them. That's pretty fishy. If you ask me it's the beginning of a revisit to the 2000 hanging chad debacle all over again. This shouldn't be about the candidates, this should be about the people, the voters. And frankly, I'm shocked by the Rev. Sharpton's protest. I'm guessing he'd see this differently if the results of counting the delegates went toward his candidate's favor.

Agree, Gabe. I am afraid these caucus wins Obama has racked up might be misleading. Caucuses generally under represent older people and working class voters (people who can't make a meeting at a VERY specific time). Usually, it's the richer, party faithful (more liberal) voters who flood to caucuses. Obama getting many red state voters in caucuses might suggest republicans switching over in an effort to make him the nominee for insidious reasons. God Help Me, but I see that freight train coming. I think they'd rather run against a liberal, junior senator, than a moderate with more credentials. I hope I am just wrong, or too cynical.

Gabe Wrote: I agree Michigan perhaps shouldn't count since only Hillary's name was on the ballot. However, EVERYONE'S name was on the ballot in Florida and Hillary won that fair and square without anyone campaigning in the state. Florida has been a decisive state in the last two presidential elections and to tell those voters thier votes don't count is absurd! Sharpton is an ignorant fool and needs to shut up and pay attention to the missing campaign money he can't account for. He DOES NOT represent me as a Black person in America.

Really??? No Sharpton does not speak for black people. Neither does Julian Bond or YOU! What kind of apologist excuses cheating? You dissapoint me. I don't care if the same thing happened for McCain and Huckabee, cheating is cheating and this should not be excused. The DNC made a decision and better stick by it.

Agree with "An Opinion" 100%. If Michigan is a "do over", let's make it a real primary and not a caucus where a handful of people get to decide the candidate for the majority. Let's cast votes like we do in the genral election. That's the only true democratic way to do things.

If you don't do something to resolve the voters' votes in these states, you can kiss them goodbye in the general. That's the reality. There needs to be some sort of settlement. Michigan, I see Obama's point, he wasn't on the ballot, maybe they can hold a revote. FLA, is different, all the candidates were on the ballot and no one campaigned.. I think you have to count those votes. Those democrats came out and voted, and Hillary got the majority. It's not meaningless that she got more votes than John McCain. If the DNC fails to do this, and it puts Obama over the top, you can count on those states going red in the general, and folks, that's huge. We need MI and FLA desperately.

Make a broad unsubstantiated generalization. Say "I’m done" and rattle some papers and pound the desk like Rush does. Great

Which overseas votes? The military votes that may have been cast AFTER the election. I bet your book didn't tell you that.

Really, though, it's all moot. The recount was ended by the Florida GOP and Bush got his presidency.

I'm done.

Kirk;
At a time when the Gore team's mantra was "Count every vote," for instance, its attorneys were trying to disqualify any ballot cast by overseas military personnel that was even remotely questionable.

Read this in a book once about the 2000 election. Saw it on TV. It is not myth. The attorneys were actually trying to disqualify military votes.

It's kinda like the performance enhancing drug scandals thruout professional athletics. Florida and Michigan wished to have more power in the game of Democratic primaries. So they jumped at an advantage that was in clear violation of the rules of the game.
The result: asterisks next to their records, no shot at the hall of fame, temporary suspension.

To say that Florida wasn't given the chance to play by the rules is ridiculous. they knew the consequences of their actions. blame the FL and MI Democratic parties, be angry at the DNC for a stiff punishment-but- this is not the fault of the candidates.

I'm sure that when the candidates were consulted by the DNC about the suspension of delegates in FL and MI the candidates were relieved, happy to agree not to campaign in those two state. Looking forward to the prospect of maybe sitting down to dinner with their families for ONE NIGHT in January instead of being forced by over eager state parties saying "what about us, come say hello to us, we matter too, we matter MORE than the other 46 states".

The supreme irony is that had MI and FL left well enough alone they would be getting spoiled with attention as their voters and apportioned delegates would matter MORE the LATER they occurred in the primary schedule.

OH well- i refuse to shed tears over the penalties imposed upon rule breakers.
If i was a FL or MI voter, however, i'd be PISSED at my state party.

I agree Michigan perhaps shouldn't count since only Hillary's name was on the ballot. However, EVERYONE'S name was on the ballot in Florida and Hillary won that fair and square without anyone campaigning in the state. Florida has been a decisive state in the last two presidential elections and to tell those voters thier votes don't count is absurd! Sharpton is an ignorant fool and needs to shut up and pay attention to the missing campaign money he can't account for. He DOES NOT represent me as a Black person in America.

I guess I just assumed that the 2000 election was still fresh in America's collective memory.

The same election when the Florida GOP deprived many in black precincts the opportunity to vote and ended the recount.

I don't understand how anyone could think it would be fair to all of a sudden count these votes? There was only one name on the ballot, and not one single candidate was fighting to get either Michigan, or Florida to count before the actual votes.

Like many have mentioned, you can't change the rules halfway through. I think Americans are very upset right now with the power that super-delegates hold, as well as stuff like this.

as did you Kirk

The DNC created this mess. But I fault all the candidates for going along with the DNC. After the fact is not the time to voice concern. And let us not forget that Andrew Young is a Clinton supporter. If he was a man of any conviction he and the others should have voiced there concerns beforehand. Another perfect example about these so called civil rights activist do not work for the best interest of the people but for there own personal gain. The DNC should bear the finacial burden of holding new elections or stand by there orginal decision. Any thing less would be unfair.

An election with only one name on the ballot? How sleazy can the HRC supporters get? If you want those states to elect delegates, hold actual primaries or caucuses, there is still a lot of time. The only people who are opposed to that are HRC supporters who fear that their candidate would lose if there is more than one name on the ballot.

I think everyone should keep in mind that the Democratic party is nothing but a big club. We run our meetings according to our rules and the only expectation is that club members follow the rules. If you don't like the rules, work within the club to change those rules - or - get the heck out of the club.
The fact of these FL and MI primaries not having any delegates attached to them is a club rule (a penalty for not following the clearly stated club rules, actually). This is not a case of disenfranchisement or a reflection of the state of American democracy.
The Democratic Party: Love it or Leave it, or put your shoulder to the wheel and change it.
Just STOP playing CalvinBall.
Thank You.

I agree with Sharpton, and would hope that Obama's supporters will agree with the rules regarding super delegates, should the super delegates be the determining margin in selecting the Democratic nominee. I am confident that Hillary's supporters will accept the outcome if it comes from the super delegate margin, but I fear an uprising should it be determined the other way. The rules, it seems, should only apply to Senator Clinton, but should be suspended when it comes to The Uniter.

Well said, flyover.

You make a strong case. How can I argue?

SB,

Obama is not waiving his finger alone. He didn't come up with this rule.

The DNC AND Hillary Clinton herself waived her finger and agreed that those primaries shouldn't count.

Why do you keep ignoring this point?

If she had come out before Iowa and made this issue it would have more credibility.

If she had come out before Michigan voted it would have more credibility.

She waited until her first overwhelming lost to bring it up! Please respond to that. She is being a hypocrite. Please explain how she is not.

S.B.:
The votes have BEEN counted. Those yet to vote and our SuperHero-Delegates are welcome to take those Florida and Michigan votes into consideration when making their decision.
The fact remains that BEFORE Floridians and Michigan(ers?)(onians?)voted they were INFORMED that there would be NO DELEGATES attached to their votes.
Them's the rules.
Like it or not.

actually Kirk you are flat wrong

Too bad the voters in MI and FL took the time to vote.

I am thinking that the voters in Mi and Fla should place a class action lawsuit against their perspective states and the DNC if at all possible. Who in their right mind wants to make the case that because they did not campaign and took off their names (which by the way Obama broke the rules by running the ad and had the option to leave his name on the ballot). Again, the American people want to disenfranchise entire States from the nominating process. How about caucuses--do you ever look on your voting card and see where it says you will place your vote--yet when they have a caucus the State you live in never sent you via snail mail where you will caucus and what times or what that entails. e.g. In Kansas we had from 6-7pm to arrive or not be counted. Talk about blocking out a group of voters in a big way--and to boot it was at a college. Let's mention the influence of the MSM on this outcome so far--do you reasonably think if they had been doing their jobs as journalists that this activist (Obama) would be this far. This whole process is so undemocratic and to think that the DNC has the right to ask people to vote again---absurd--You get one vote according to the Constitution. Obama whined his way into this position by calling Clinton's racist--typical of black people to avoid any responsibility---then he minimized Clinton when Nevada occurred--lied to the public he was ahead--another lie. The killer part is that the blacks do not even realize that the Pied Piper is having his strings tuned by WASPs. If he was real and not a fraud--he would have said no to all this in the beginning as the big Uniter--and practiced what he preaches about "We are the USA" Instead he again watches Clinton already being accused of such things as 'stealing the election' if they get seated. If you people think for one moment that Hillary is not going to win--guess again --super delegates are the protection of the party for these type of nominees--the ones that do not have the credentials yet because the electorate is such an ill informed bunch of morons overall they progress. Welcome to President McCain--you can overall thank the DNC and the MSM.

Actually, Spock, historically the GOP has been the group to disenfranchise voters in FL.

Look all the morality police out there with words like should or shouldn't need to get this through their heads. Florida and Michigan EXIST! They vote in general elections. They don't go away because Obama wants to play kindergarden cop and wag his finger at 2 million voters going tsk tsk.

Get your heads out of the sand. These states vote in general elections! Florida also has massive connections to NY and California and any other state with large hispanic or Jewish populations.

He will not win the white house without these states and every member of the DNC knows it!

COUNT THE VOTES!

Anyone who says that counting votes in a democracy is unfair is wrong. That's what democracy means folks.

Two points:

First, the GOP-controlled legislature in FL forced the primaries early. The DNC should not have penalized them.

Second, if the DNC pulled the votes from the delegates, they should stick with it. It would be unfair to give votes to Clinton when Obama never had an opportunity.

I can only think of 2 groups that would want the standing FL results to count... Clinton supporters and the GOP.

Obama did not 'campaign in florida'. when Obama campaigns he fills stadiums. when Obama campaigns he opens offices and staffs them with energized professionals and first time volunteers who organize armies of engaged citizens to go out and create change.
What Obama did in Florida was let a 30 second National spot run on television.
Obama did not 'campaign in Florida'.

I am shocked at myself for finally agreeing with Sharpton. Thinking that my vote was going to be wasted because of the DNC ruling, I voted for Ron Paul instead of Obama. (I'm one of those anti-war nuts) It would really upset me if that spineless, war-voter Hillary changed the rules at the last moment.

I can't believe this is even in question.

Sharpton is absolutely right. The DNC took away the FL and MI delegates (for whatever reason is their own) and now Clinton wants it to count. Of course she does, because it will go in her favor.

After pulling power from the FL & MI delegates, the DNC asked the candidates to remove their names from the ballot. Most obliged. Clinton did not. And SURPRISE! she won.

Why should the DNC reward Clinton for flouting the DNC rules?