I'm sorry they oppose a mail in ballot because it in some way might be undemocratic but want to override 2.2 million votes cast and divy up the delegates 50/50. Does anyone else find those two positions at odds?

These states knew going into this race if they went ahead of what the DNC said they would NOT be counted What didn't they understand????Now Clinton wants them in for she pulled a good one and left her name on the ballot in Fl....Smart move on her part.I for ne do not think they should be counted ,in this country there are rules you SHOULD follow if you break the law TS....... Suffer they knew going on and now they are crying to bad states,maybe next time you might listen to what you are boing told.Rules are rules>>>>>>>>>

Sounds to me like Clinton is pulling a George Bush, do things the way I say or nobody wins and it will be your fault. She won't agree to anything less than having the bogus results counted as the final tally. I doubt seriously she would feel the same way had the two contests been different or if she were ahead by any measure in the contest. Though some voted, many more did not because they were informed that the primaries would not be counted. So there are more voters at stake than those that voted in those primaries. Clinton wants to win, and I can respect that, but she does not care how she wins and that is a serious problem for me. She knows that the campaigns will need to approve any do over and is stating very clearly right now that she will not allow that. That is a Bush 101 tactic. Give me my win or everyone loses. I will not vote in the general if she is nominated because i could not support the current CinC that advocates such a position, so I will certainly not support another one, no matter what her party.

Yup, just another regular Politician (Obama) trying to silence 2.2 million voters... I love how if we counted MI and FL Clinton would have been ahead since Super Tuesday... No wonder he wants to hide these votes... what a great POTUS he'd be. Uniting this country... JUST WORDS!

There's one way to ensure the vote isn't tampered with and that's to count the results in a democratic election where 2.2 million democrats voted, at least from Florida. Michigan may need a redo, or all the elected delegates could stand as uncommitted. What people dont understand here is that delegates were elected, hundreds of them. Those people should not be un-elected, unless the can run in anotehr election. it would be undemocratic, and disrespectful to those people who put their names forward, campaigned and are now probably raising funds to go to convention.

It's not the Soviet Union or China, you cant just override a vote and un-elect delegates because they dont favor you.

These delegates need to be allowed to stand or run again in another election.

All the candidates did agreed to DNC rules. Hillary so desperate and devisive went ahead and betrayed. This is a Candidate you call "has experience or ready for day1? Typicall clinton strategy, lies, mislead and cheat. Her husband did the same thing while he was a President. Remeber, first"I did not have a sexual relationship with ML" then after being busted" I did have a sexual relationship with that woman, ML.the Clintons have shown their true colors.

What about those voters that stayed at home knowing that their votes would not count? The rules are the rules.

Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the rich, savory irony of Democrats fighting to NOT count Florida votes.

I agree with Ferraro, Barack wouldn't be in this position if he was a white man.

Any candidate who has energized the American people, called for Change in Washington politics, run a consistent positive campaign and have a Clear Vision for the future of America would be the NOMINEE by now.

No talk about a revote, super delegates, vice-presidency or other strategies to steal the election would even be considered or mentioned.

Just the thought that this election could come down to Florida again makes me sick to my stomach! How quick we forget!

the Obama camp does not oppose the mail in ballot. there has been no specific comment opposing such a plan, just because it was not mentioned as a preferred way to get it done, does not indicate opposition. Shoddy reporting.
Further HRC, this is not a Parisan process, there is only one party involved here. The two states broke the rules, but since it turned out in your favor, you are looking to take advantage. Way to put the country first and think about the millions who would still like to be heard in a recognized vote. At best those two non-primaries were another poll.

lol again, this election campaign has crossed the line of stupid and ridiculous!

I know I probably shouldn't ask this question, but why is it that every time an issue comes up such as this (the same happened with NAFTA), the finger gets pointed at Obama?
Now Obama wants to hide the votes? How stupid is that statement?? You hillary sheeple need to go take your meds and calm down. We understand that she is behind and in danger of not winning the nomination, but everything that goes on, that doesn't go her way, is not Obama's fault.

Obama didn't make the rules, neither did hillary. So she should stop trying to make this look like another Obama gaffe.

WHY DO WE NEED TO WASTE TIME , MONEY AND ABILITY TO CONSOLIDATE AROUND OUR PRESUMPTIVE NOMMINEE BARACK OBAMA.

Consider the top 9 big states that have voted so far
State . . . . . . . Obama . . . . . . . .Clinton
California . . .2,126,000 . . . . . . .2,553,000
Texas . . . . . 1,358,000 . . . . . . .1,459,000
New York. . . . . 698,000 . . . . . . .1,003,000
Illinois. . . . 1,302,000 . . . . . . . .662,000
Ohio . . . . . . 982,000. . . . . . . 1,212,000
Georgia . . . . . 704,000 . . . . . . . .330,000
New Jersey. . . . 492,000 . . . . . . . .603,000
Virginia . . . . 627,000 . . . . . . . .350,000
Washington . . . 354,000 . . . . . . . .316,000

Total . . . . . 8,643,000 . . . . . . .8,487,000

The rules are rules, Fl anf MI can't be seated comments, are some of the most juvenile opinions I have ever heard.

MI and FL will be seated at convention and always were going to be. Everyone knows that.

They were always going to be seated by the winner at convention, as their republican counterparts will be. The only issue now is that there wont be a clear winner at convention.

If it isnt resolved before then Obama and Clinton will have to get up at convention and say why they do or do not want them seated as is.

There is no better way to guarentee that obama will lose the white house than if he argues against seating MI and FL or argues to override an election where 2.2 million Americans voted and divy them up like a kindergarden snack 50/50, and prevails. It's over then.

I do not believe he will do that as its political suicide. So what's he doing?? Stalling, so it doesnt look like Clinton is winning. That's all.

The DNC needs to seat these delegates SOON or agree to a revote SOON, because we all know they will be seated at convention. Regardless of the juvenile aguements against seating them that completely ignore the political process.

Howard Dean, by the way, should have his but kicked out of the convention and the DNC forever for this fiasco. 100% his fault and he is refusing to show leadership to solve it in a timely manner,as it should have been resolved already. He is a disaster for the democratic party.

Um Washington, Virginia and Georgia are not "big states" Nice try though to distort the numbers as usual from teh Obama camp.

If the Clinton people are really concerned with the rights of the voters to have theri delegates seated despite their purposeful breach of the rules laid down by the DNC, then a 50/50 split is the obvious and easy solution. To insist that the results of those illegal primaries be made legitimate is beyond ridiculous. Obama was not even on the ballot in Michigan and in Flordia, how much of that win was based on simple name recognition? Obama, following the DNC rules, did not campaign and, therefore, had no opportunity to introduce himself to the voters of Florida. Also, how many voters stayed home because the results would not count? You cannot call either Michigan or Florida a legitimate 'win' for Clinton. Just to be clear, going in to primary season, I was a Clinton supporter but because of things that have happened in the course of the primary (like this situation), I have moved my support to Obama and I represent one of Clinton's 'core' supporters age wise, race wise, etc.

If the DNC backs down from their previous position, there will be chaos in the next election as states jockey for position and jump ahead of one another. It is will also prove that Will Rogers was right when he said, "I do not belong to any organized poltiical party; I'm a Democrat."

Um Washington, Virginia and Georgia are not "big states" Nice try though to distort the numbers as usual.

Washington a "big state" lmao

I agree with Ferraro, Barack wouldn't be in this position if he was a white man.

This racial comment is a shame. Look at the history of this country. To suggest that Barak is successful is because of his skin color is very low coming from People who have ruled this country since the beginning. I am a white male and very disgusted about those racial comments. Obama is the only candidate who can reach out both side blacks and whites. When Hillary won OH and other states that hold a majority of whites who voted for her, nobody said that she won because she is white. Please enough of these negative comments that are very devicive and Hillary is 100% behind it. this a strategy to win PA. shame on you Hillary.

I am so disgusted by Democrats disrespecting the voters in Florida and Michigan. Would Dodd say the same if the DNC tried to do this to the voters of CT? The DNC has totally messed up the nomination process - if Dems had a winner-take-all system like the Republicans, Hillary would have the nomination by now.

About three years ago a well known televangelist, Perry Stone, told his congregation that God spoke to him and said Sen. Clinton will be the next President. There is nothing ABC News or the other networks can do to stop Sen. Clinton from becoming President.

Change the name of this country to the United Big States only, all the other states are too small to matter.

I think that the delegates should be seated not in the interest of a specific candidate, but in the interest of the Democratic party. We will need these states come GE and if either candidate comes off as seemingly willing to disenfranchise their votes, it could potentially (negatively) impact the GE outcome.

I think a 51/49 split would be a good compromise. It doesn't really give the Clinton camp any huge advantage in pledged delegate count and it also let's the Obama camp look like they are taking the high road by acknowledging that Clinton did perform better in Florida and arguably Michigan. Since that will never happen though...

I think a 50/50 seating is the way to go on this where the pledged delegates are divided equally amongst the candidates and the superdelegates move forward with their traditional role and casting their vote as they wish.

America is not the Soviet Union, or Kenya for that matter.

You cannot unelect delegates to divy up an election as some partisan controlled Central Committee sees fit. The 50/50 business is downright Soviet, or like some UN intervention in Kenya. You can't do that in America and there's no reason to.

If Obama tried to get that through a credentialling committee kiss the genral election goodbye. There would be no point. Obama's left leanings are concern enough in a general matchup. A soviet delegate scheme is not going to pass muster and FL at least would just remove his name from the ballot, if their electionis ignored. They have said as much.

All these, Hillary is trying to find the loophole. She expected to be the nominee immediately after Super Tuesday. Nothing worked on her side. Florida and Michigan voted before Super Tuesday. She did not raise any issue about it.

What was the reason for her to fly to Florida? Just only to thank people who voted for her while knowing the votes do not count!

Am pretty sure if she could had been nominated after Super Tuesday, she could had kept quiet and forget those 2million she is claiming are important now.

Mail balloting again!!!!! I am little concerned about it. I am sure there will be cheating involved. Why don't we just divide the delegates 50- 50.
Voting via mail is safe and will not be a fair game.

I find it amazing that the obama camp can call counting votes, "stealing an election" but want to override an election where 2.2 million democrats cast ballots and just divy up the delegates 50/50.

That's not stealing an election???

Wow you can cut that irony with a knife. Um overriding a democratic election in favour of one candidate is well "stealing an election", and there's no way the American people will se it any other way.

But its Clinton who wants to "win at all costs" and is "dividing the party" right?????

Funny, I dont see it that way.

WHERE IS 2.2 Million coming from. She is even counting Florida that did not have any other candidates on the ballot.

By the way, the request to divide the delegates 50/50 at the credentialing committee would have to come from these states themselves, and there isn't a smowball's chance of that happening.

Count the votes or re-vote are the only two options.

correction.

WHERE IS 2.2 Million coming from? She is even counting Michigan that did not have any other candidates on the ballot.

Wake up people. how can you consider the election in FL and MI when Hillary's name was the only one in the ballot? Who was she compete against? come on. How about the people who did not vote because they were told that their voices will not be counted? If Hillary did abide n=by the rules, we would not have to be where we are now. she created a mess. she is not trustworthy. nominate her and she will deceive you more. and put the country in more danger.

I agree with Bascio.

Hussein Obama is just another dishonest politician. While he ran ads in both FL and MI, Obama now wants to silence 2.2 million voters.

If MI and FL were counted, Hillary would be ahead by a long shot. Obama is a hypocrite who only wants to win - any any cost.

Sure Hillary and McCain should run together with Hillary as VP to McCain. They are two sore losers of the same old.

correction.

WHERE IS 2.2 Million coming from? She is even counting Michigan that did not have any other candidates on the ballot.

Neither campaign is going to come to a consensus on how to resolve this issue. Obama is pushing for a caucus and Clinton is pushing for a primary, both for obvious reasons.

Regardless of the solution, these states' participation in the convention will be vital to the democratic strategy to win the back White House.

Where as I would love to see them seated proportionally to vote count, the rules *were* outlined at the onset of this race and a 50/50 split is the least expensive and arguably fair way to ensure that these states are seated.

I think Clinton should aggressively argue her case to the superdelegates of those states and that is where she has the possibility to widen the delegate count in those states (if my understanding that the superdelegates from those states are not currently seated is correct).

Honest what didn't Obama, a Harvard grad, understand about agreeing not to campaign yet releasing an ad in Florida before the vote? He lost anyway...It's okay with his campaign to bully or disenfranchise everyone who isn't voting for him.

Let them eat cake!

Just do the the two primaries over and be done with it!!!! It should nt be a caucus or mail in-it should be duplicated as a primary...

Yes Hillary is so kind, so willing to ensure that Michigan and Florida's voters are counting, is she going to cry again? The reality is simply -her way or the high way. Voters have put her second and she wants to put herself first. Please stop trying to take the lead when you have to be led. The division between big states and small states, blue states and red states is simply discriminatory. People somehow think that winning big states is a way of winning presidency, the problem is simply that Clinton has not won some of these states again McCain, but against Obama, same paryy candidates. Wo ever the nominee will be New York will remain in democrats' hand. The message is simple: are you better off now? if not do not vote McCain who will be en extension of failed Bush policies.

The Obama campaign ran a "national" ad, which was permitted to run in ALL states. He was not trying to 'campaign' in FL and MI knowing the votes didn't count. The ads he ran were national and the states didn't have any problem with it.

The reality is, if you include Florida, it doesn't change Hillary's position much. In Michigan, only Clinton and Kucinch were on the ballot, so it certainly would NOT be fair to include without a re-vote.

If Obama really wanted all votes to be counted he would not be pressing for caucuses that limit votes, twist hours of operation during work schedules, confuses voters, forces PUBLIC declarations of one's vote (which leaves dissenting voters afraid to go against the crowd, spouse, church members, whatever). He wants a system that allows a confused, disorganized, public vote to represent millions, when the actual caucus has perhaps 50,000 in a large state. I mean how is even 100,000 caucus votes a fair representation of 30,000,000 people? It isn't. And he knows it. And he doesn't care.

The shortest time to vote, with the most confusion, the most possible public pressure, with the least votes representing huge states. That is what his heart's desire is.

Limit. Control. Confuse. Block. Win.

what a sham if that isn't the politics of old.

A national ad that he knew would run in FL. Please, there is no way you can make this seem like an "innocent" mistake.

Yeah 2009, great to see your post!

2009, I haven't heard Obama "call for a caucus." In fact, he's said in interviews over the last couple of days that he'll accept whatever the party decides to do, as long as it's fair to both candidates. No where have I seen Obama "call for a caucus."

Many posters on this blog would like people to believe that Clinton won 2.2 million votes in the Florida primary. That is clearly not the case. Following is a breakdown of the voting as reported by the Washington post:

Hillary Clinton..857,208
Barack Obama.....569,041
John Edwards.....248,604
Other.............50,411

Too many posts, not enough research. "Truth", did you look up the fact that, as you say, Clinton broke the rules in Florida." Obama was the only one running ads in Fla. Clinton won, but did not go to the state until after the vote. Facts are truth. And to the poster that said Clinton was the only one on the ballot in Fl. FACTS, get them straight.

So mail in vote is even worse than caucus? Obama's campaign is really ridiculous.

James, you left out Massachusetts, maybe on purpose?

Georgia is a BIG state?
And Florida is not - I know, it doesn't count. Just the fact that Obama ran ads night and day, despite other candidates pulling their national ads - and he stick got his butt kicked by 300,000.

So Plouffe forgot that Obama had promised to Florida voters last fall that he will do everything he can to make sure their votes being counted. I am wondering why no one from Obama campaign never mentioned it again? Maybe words are just words, like NAFTA, Iraq, etc.

"SB",
I'm with you. The Democratic Party is the party of inclusion. The right wing posers, posing as members of Obama's campaign, seem to be doing their best to disrupt this nominating process. A re-vote by mail is the only sane way to go. (Senator Levin of Michigan actually referred to it as a caucus by mail -- don't caucuses favor Obama?). The re-vote is going to happen. Dean cannot torpedo this one.

then continue to believe the distorted lies. I could care less. At least I DO know the truth. It might help you if you would do some research and find out the truth as well, instead of repeating and distorting, which kills your credibility AND your integrity.

Obama has said and Axelrod has said that Obama wants caucuses.

He loves them. They give you the fewest votes to represent the most people, in the shortest amount of time, in the most confusing manner possible.

He is not what he says he is - and your defenses of his behavior is always something from Clinton's past.

That is like you getting pulled over by the highway patrol for someone elses speeding.

You are trying to distract with the past (that Barack hates so much) and not answer the point. We know Clinton is a mess. But that is not the topic. The topic is Is Obama What He Says He Is, or Only What He THINKS He Is?

He never answers with a direct yes or no. He says "Well Clinton did this in 1992, and Clinton never did that in 1996 and . . ."

That is not a defense for what YOU OBAMA are doing NOW.

THEIR PAST DOES NOT NEGATE YOUR PRESENT.

Regarding a mail-in primary:

Obama: "I think there's some concerns in terms of making sure that whatever we do is fair, and that votes are properly counted and the logistics make sense"

Axelrod: "But obviously there are concerns about a mail-in vote. I mean, there are concerns about eligibility, ballot security"

Does anyone find the irony in these statements? In my state's caucus, there was nothing that resembled verification of identity, eligibility and security.

There were far more people who participated in our doesn't-count-for-squat primary than in our state's caucus. I do see why the caucus is favored by the Obama campaign: In Washington state, the caucus was 68/31 and the primary was 51/46. The logistics of a caucus doesn't make sense given the choice between that and a primary.

LA in Indiana : Lies? Did Obama run national TV ads before Florida primary? Could the ads being viewed by Florida voters? Did any other candidates run any ads (locally or nationally) there? Why would you keep lying while trying to label others with the true story as liars? Where are the well educated Obama supporters? Hmm, I forgot most of them are simply one-day-democrat-but-forever-republican, and had already returned to Rep. base after casting votes for Obama to knock Clinton out.

nosense03....its called RESEARCH! You should try it sometime, you might learn something other than clinton and rove talking points.

Reseasrch if you dare! Be careful, I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself.

BOth states have flately rejected a caucus. Not going to happen. They haven't even commented on divying up the delegates arbitrarily by a central committee, as it's absurd, soviet and childish.

There are only two options. Count the votes, or have a re-vote by mail.

One or the other. Not seating these states is not an option.

So they leave out FL and MI, Obama wins the nomination who really think after that he is going to hold FL, I sure don't.

SB guess you are one that the rules and regs apply to everyone but you>>>>You see the rules were in place way before this vote took place ,the person voting had nothing to do with this it is the big wigs so yes,I feel sorry for their votes not counting buttttttttttttttt.Damn if there are two sets of rules for everything guess we can consider ourselves no better then some other countries that do as they damn well please.......Change the rules to apply to what you want, when I went to college it didn't work that way/ if they come up with the monies to re do the election good ,then they can count.

I'm sorry, but a blog on the Huffington Post is not "research." Someone's blog hardly constitutes a definitive source for information. However, in combination of other corroborating reliable sources might make your points harder to refute.

I think debate here is healthy, but you lose so much credibility when you resort to calling people stupid. So, please, let's stick to the issues and denigrate one another.

The reason why its called "caucus by mail" is because the PArty pays not the state. They are mail in votes, possibly with one polling station per county or town, which would be called a fire hall caucus with a mail in ballot, again because the PArty pays. It would not however be a meeting with set time and place and waiting to be counted in public.

It would for all intents and purposes be a mail in primary the PArty pays for and it is the only siolution other than seating the delegates already selected.

The other option would be to count Fl and then have a full primary in MI with money raised instead of paying for both.

I really do not see what is the fuss if Hillary wants to run until Denver, all of you keep saying Obama is ahead, he is winning so what is the worry?

McCain was not calling for Huckabee to drop out was he, so if Obama is way in front then let him run his race and be quiet, what difference does it make, he is winning right so all that will happen is that he will win by some more.

Oops, that should be NOT denigrate one another.

of course, ANY article that disputes your hillary lies is not a 'definitive source'

h

The rules are the rules arguement is for kindergarden children, not the Democratic Party or any sofisticated political process to nominate a candidate that is meant to WIN an election.

The point is to WIN the whitehouse. Fl and MI were ALWAYS going to be seated. They were NEVER not going to be seated!

It was just assumed the winner would be clear and then ask for them to be seated at convention.

The process exists WITHIN THE RULES to either accept the vote as is, revote, or ask for them to be seated at convention. One of these has to happen, anyone with any knowledge of this process or any level of political sophistication knows this. The Obama campaign is just stalling.

The "rules are the rules" arguement shows a laughable ignorance of the rules and proceedures, not to mention the intention of the punishment, (that these states not get attention and money for their primaries). The intention was NEVER to ban them from convention. NEVER. It's not possible.

The DNC is in the business of winning elections not conceding them before they have begun.

Hillary Clinton won in both Florida and Michigan. The names of all candidates were included in the Florida ballot.
As for Michigan, the Obama campaign gave instructions to their followers to vote "uncommitted", and they lost there too. If the Obama campaign was noble it would simply accept the vote as it is. This is politics though and politics is anything but noble.

LA in Indiana : Just another typical arrogant Obama supporter. Too bad and I have to keep wondering where are those well-educated Obama supporters.

First off I am a resident of Florida. My sister saw the Obama ad prior to the primary here. We have never had a caucus here and so it would be a major mistake to have one now. The voters of Florida did not make the decision to move the date of the primary. Senator Obama was on the ballot here. He was not on the ballot in Michigan because he decide to remove his name as did Senator Edwards. I also heard that in Michigan voters were told to vote for undecided by Senator Obama and Senator Edwards.

The easiest thing to do would be to count the votes that occurred giving Senator Obama the undecided votes which occurred in Michigan. This would be more than fair to him.

LA in Indiana, I didn't say that. I just think posting a blog by an Obama supporter as a source for "research" is not going to sway my vote. I am open to a debate on the ISSUES, so please engage in one rather than flinging ### on people and calling everyone names if they don't agree with you.

FL Resident, If you want to give Obama the undecided vote in MI, then he should get the rest of the field in FL, giving him 50% of the vote. Edwards got 14% and "other" got 3%.

That is a fact on all the blogs the Obama supporters were telling MI voter to vote undecided, they wanted to show that Hillary was not popular, there were even robo calls being made in MI to vote undecided because Obama's name was not on the ballot.

Fl voters also had another ballot with a tax issue to vote on, so am sure voters paid attention to that election.

When Sharpton makes the claim that people in FL did not come out to vote so what did they do with the ballot on the tax issue, did they ignore that one also?

It was not up to the Obama campaign to not count FL and MI. I do not think it would be unreasonable to ask for the opportunity to campaign in those states prior to the vote. I do not believe that the Clinton camp would be so adamant in their stance had the results of those false primaries been different.

@Don | Mar 12, 2008 12:57:34 PM:

What kind of logic is that? His name was on the FL ballot whereas it wasn't on the MI ballot. Giving him the whole undecided bloc of votes is generous and favors him in MI. Giving him everything that wasn't "Clinton" in FL is fuzzy logic.

I'm not advocating here what should be done with the MI and FL vote. I would just like to understand your reasoning and logic on that.

Don: How about just give the presidency to Obama? We can save tons of money. LOL.

SJ,
No matter how you try to spin it, the fact remains that there were voters who didn't show up because they knew their votes wouldn't count.

Was there any legal requirement for Obama to take his name off of the MI ballot or was it just a matter of his choice to do so?

If it was his personal choice then how can anyone be blamed for his boneheaded decision to take his name off of the ballot?

Its not spin but if you have a valid tax issue and you refuse to vote on it what kind of voter are you?

So some are only interested in voting when it's Obama in the race all other voting issues don't matter?

FACT: ALL candidates agreed to the penalties imposed on MI and FL for moving their primaries up.

FACT: HRC was the only major candidate to leave her name on the ballot in MI. (She was probably too busy to take it off, as she has been to make a copy of her tax returns).

FACT: A so-called "non-affiliated" organization did mailings and other gotv efforts for HRC in FL.

FACT: A national cable ad ran for Obama in FL; there was no way for it not to.

FACT: Not a peep was heard from the Clinton campaign about the poor disenfranchised MI and FL voters until AFTER she failed to lock up the nomination on Super Tuesday.

What a hypocrite: try to change the rules after the game is over, and then accuse the other side of being undemocratic. How very Clintonian.

And you know what? Thanks to the uncritical media, who have been cowed by this crap about being biased towards Obama, she just might get away with it.

And some people wonder why so many other people are disillusioned with politics!

Is there anyone who will flatly deny that voters stayed home because they knew their vote for a candidate wouldn’t count?

FL & MI new very well that they were playing with fire and now that they got burned they are crying for a re-do. I really feel for the voters of both of these states, however, it was their elected officials who created this mess and not the DNC or the parties. MI has a completely democratically controlled governing body. Fl is without a doubt heavily controlled by republicans, however, when the democrats had a chance to place a protest vote they failed miserably. Florida House voted 118-0 on HB537 and the Senate voted 37-2 on SB0960. At the time of the vote, there were 41 democrats in the house and 14 in the senate. I have a hard time standing up for those who wouldn't stand up for themselves. I believe that anything short of a re-vote, funded by the state parties, within the current DNC rules is unacceptable and would be viewed as tampering with the agreed upon process. Unfortunately, I do not believe that this will happen due to the deadline of June 10th and my daughter and father-in-law in FL will not have their votes counted.

To those who want the votes in MI and FL to stand as is without a re-vote: Why are you afraid of a re-vote? The people who voted for Clinton are free to do so again. In FL, those who voted for Edwards and “other” can now vote for someone in the running, including Clinton. She may do even better than before. There should either be a re-vote, or stand by the original DNC rules.