From Florida's track record I'd say a caucus would work better. Floridians are less likely to screw it up the way they usually screw up their elections.

Anyone remember a fella by the name of President Albert G.

Now TCG, why would you want the Democratic party to have a caucus? You wouldn't be worried about stopping Hillary Clinton from becoming a competitor to McCain, so you want a caucus which would favor Obama?

TCG, they don't hold caucuses in the general election as Obama will find out in those red state he won, so why play stupid here? FL and MI deserve to have their voices heard. And boy do some of those FL folks have an earful ready for the Obama folks. They know who refused to allow their delegates to be seated. Same with MI.

Anyone who advocates a caucus is suggesting that voters be disenfranchised.

Personally, I dont see why new primaries are even needed. In the case of FL, Obama had an advantage because he campaigned there by running TV ads and still lost by a significant margin. In MI, if we simply give him all the undecided votes (which were not really all his), we are giving him an advantage there also. Clinton won MI by a significant amount also.

So it appears to me that even when having the advantage in both states, the only reason he objects is because he lost.

Um lets see, they are whining because; when they broke the rules that they agreed to and KNEW that their primaries would not count prior to having them, they went ahead and had them anyway. Now they want the DNC to pay for their intentional violations of the rules. So it was the local groups that screwed the voters don't blame the DNC at large. That is like blaming the cop when you get a ticket for speeding.

The caucus's are a circus. Just read about the problems in Texas they had. Have a primary and let the people vote
properly and in private.

Florida and Michigan knew what the rules and penalties were before their elected officials, Congressmen and Governors alike, decided to move their primaries against the DNC's rules. Now they are mad and want their delegates to count. It is unfair to change the rules in the middle of the game and Howard Dean and the DNC is right. EVERYONE knew the rules before the start and everyone agreed to those rules. If the Florida and Michigan voters are going to mad at anyone, then they should be mad at their elected officials who voted and passed laws to move the date, knowing what the consequences would be. The elected officials of those states made their voters votes not count. Not the DNC. And I like both Hillary and Obama but fair is fair. For her to now want those votes to count, shows a person that you can't trust when the cards are stacked against her. I have lost all respect for her for demanding these delgates be seated. She should have said that they knew the rules and agreed with Howard Dean and the DNC. It just goes to show you that in her, you won't have change because it's win at all costs...lie, cheat, steal. How can you trust anything else she says when even Ray Charles can see she wants to change the rules that she agreed to in the beginning because she would benefit. She's not even asking for a do-over. Why, because she know's that she can't beat Mr. Obama by a wide enough margin in either of those 2 states to push ahead of him in the delegate count. The total thing is disgusting and this is why people get so disenfranchised with the system.

DCvoter, how can you lose in a state where you didn't campaign and in another state when you were not on the ballot? How can you call any such vote valid when people who knew their votes would not be counted didn't bother to show up? there is no way the current results are valid.

I would bet new primaries would give Clinton more delegates. I wonder if there are any side bet websites setting up for that yet. LOL

If money is the determining factor, it wouldnt surprise me to see independent financial sources pay for them.

Speaking of oddities, does anyone find it odd that it was a republican controlled legislature in Florida and a republican dominated senate in Michigan that moved up the primaries knowing it would disenfranchise all of the democratic voters in those state primaries? Seems to me the state Democratic committees are not very smart in those states!

Louis, let me try and get your point. You, a so called democrat, want to disenfranchise two swing state and give the republicans a two to nothing advantage even before the general begin? Just so Obama can maintain his lead? And you all call yourselves more educated than Clinton folks? Get real.

It seems to me a bit nervy for the folks in charge of the Florida Democrats to ask for $18 million to re-do the primary they messed up by choosing a date that went against the agreement they had with the National Democrats.

Louis - the voter turnouts in MI and FL were significant... in other words the voters made sure their voices were heard. Obama did run tv ads in FL and Clinton did not so he had an advantage and still lost. In MI, the undecided vote (all candidates except Clinton and Kucinich) could be given to Obama and he still lost. That sends a pretty clear message to me... FL and MI voters went for Clinton greater than 50% in both states.

Brenda - the caucuses in TX were not the only tainted aspect of the TX results. In TX, the delegates are apportioned based on registered Dems in the areas. In other words, areas without a lot of registered Dems but with lots of voters casting votes in the primaries get fewer delegates resulting in unfair representation in the delegate count. This was analyzed and show to benefit Obama because the areas he took (urban) have an unfair number more delegates. Even after that, he still lost TX popular votes and 2/3 of the state voted for Clinton over 50%. So her win there is actually more significant than the delegate count implies. Rules are rules but these are things the SDs consider.

The DNC definitely should not pay for it. Let the states who broke the rules pay, and consider it a fine for breaking the rules in the first place.

Also, Louis has a valid point. There's no way of knowing how many voters didn't go to the polls because they knew their votes wouldn't be counted.

Hey Derek. You say we knew the rules. True, but we did not make the decision. The state legislature did and the FL legislature is about 2 to 1 republican. We are being relegated to second class and told our votes won't count because a Republican conrolled legislature did this to us. DON'T TELL US OUR VOTES SHOULD NOT COUNT. And by the way, we all have TVs and newspapers in FL, so when we voted it was from an informed standpoint.

Lyd then come right out and say you Obama folks want to disenfranchise the voters in both Fl and MI. There will be no caucuses for you guys to run up the score come the general. In light of this, I'd be interested in hearing your version of how Obama will win the White House.

DC Voter, Nice to meet you here. Hope you having fun. Just came over from MyDD where Obama's Feb 55mil is generating some buzz. Bottomline, with that kind of money and he couldnt close the deal, infact losing as badly as he did in the popular vote, he should concede. I will win the GE on that budget. Advert dont sell bad product. On Florida/MI, i dont think we need fear a re-vote but it must be in a primary. Closed!

caucus is a cheating game. If the general election is based on caucus, then go head in Florida and Michigan. For example, Hillary won TX primary but she may lose her caucus in TX

People, Louis is absolutely right! Everyone's vote should count. Everyone's! You can be sure there were voters who didn't show up because they knew their state broke the rules.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the VOTERS of Michigan and Florida didn't decide when to hold their primaries...but they are going to decide who to vote for in November. I think the DNC needs to be mending some bridges.

Caucuses are not representive of the will of the voters. WA state and TX are both proof of that. Reasons relate to the limited time and the lack of secret balloting.

Obama's voting support of students and well to do liberal lattes give him an advantage there because they can afford to take the time to caucus. Working people usually cannot caucus (the majority). Non-working people like housewives and the retired folks are often subject to peer pressure the same as college students are.

All things considered, caucuses not only do not represent the will of the majority but the Obama camp obviously uses this knowledge to their advantage and wants the caucuses to be the "re-vote" for that reason.

Caucuses are by nature not a democratic process and it amazes me they are even allowed by the Democratic party. However, the SD vote is supposed to offset the unfair aspect but of course the Obama camp does not want that to happen... yet he calls himself a democrat. LOL

Don, the folks from Fl and ML know who kept their delegates out to this point and it's the Obama people. And if you all want to have primarys now than expect Hillary to win by larger amount.

I agree completely with Don - my parents live in Florida and didn't vote because they knew it wouldn't count. They believe in RULES. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game. MI & FL should not be given special treatment and if the voters are going to be MAD at someone, they need to be angry with their legislators, not the democratic party. I'm sorry for those in Florida, especially my parents who deserve to have their vote counted, however, the residents of Florida should have been protesting this LONG before it became obvious their delegate votes might make a difference. Hindsight is 20/20 they say....

RLE, how can you be so ill informed? The Republican for instance were 9% of the Texas vote with the majority breaking for Obama! That's right, Obama!

Oh shades of the hanging chads. Get over it and let this circus run its course. Why have the taxpayers foot another 18 million bill over something as stupid as this. It is a total waste of the taxpayers money. We could use that 18 milion to help chileren who are hungry and older folks with medications etc.

Dogsoldier, it isn't the "Obama people". So easy to sling blame. The decision to not have the delegates count was made when FLORIDA decided to move the date to an unqualified time.

Bryan, you are slightly wrong so I will correct since you said to. LOL

The republican controlled legislature in FL with the agreement of the Florida Democrat Committee agreed to change the primary date even after the DNC said no. So the state committee was either duped or stupid but they could not do it without the legislature so that is where I lay the blame. The same is true for MI.

Of course the republicans in control of those state legislatures are refusing to fund new primaries to benefit democratic voters.

I think if there are new vote events, they should be primaries because that is how those states vote. You cannot expect to re-educate voters in such a short timeframe. The result would be less valid than the primaries already held. Perhaps some independent monies will surface on behalf of what is best for America.

I am still betting new primaries in both states will give Clinton more delegates than if they use the current results.

Hiya llulu... Clinton raised 3 mill yesterday in one day of online contributions. The MO has definitely shifted. The Reps historically outraise and outspend Dems in every race yet Dems still get elected because the majority of voters are not rich. So I dont think this hype about his 55 mill in Feb means squat... especially when we are talking about democrats left to vote being working class majorities that he tends to not do well with.

WestCoastMessenger

I was just expressing concern for the voters of Florida. Things seem to go badly for them and so often. These people have the worst luck. The caucus would be a good deal for them.

With a caucus all they need to do is show up. No dern hanging chads, no confounding butterfly ballots, no baffling touch screens, no disappearing electronic votes - none of that confusing stuff. Just show up for a head count and then wander off toward home. QED. I mean come on, democracy is important, dood, and Florida screws up so much that Castro, himself, has offered to send assistance north.

And the caucus would save the taxpayer money that could be used on taxcuts and other import things.

Papasangel59 you want to disenfranchise the voters of FL and ML? There will be no caucuses in the general for you to run up the score and now you want to give the republicans a two to nothing head start in those two states in the general. Boy, I'd be interested in your version of how Obama will win White House now.

Jen see DCVoter answer above. Just a question Jen what would your position be had Obama won?

Pardon me Jen I forgot to say it was nice to meet you.

To Derek-Any comment on Obama`s refusal to abide by the rule that the superdelegates can vote for whomever they choose?

The mail in ballot to all those already registered as democrats by Jan 29th is the best option. They should split the difference at 3 million each it seems reasonable.

Yea well we all know that obama only likes rules that favour him.

For all those who say that FL and MI should count I ask you this. Do you think Hillary is concerned with votes counting are just votes that favor her counting? Had Obama won these states would she still want them to count are would she argue that they shouldn't count? If she is worried about them being seated then divide the delegates evenly and that way those states still get their say at the convention. But honestly the only fair assessment is either a do over are they don't count. That way neither candidate is punished. Without campaiging Obama would not have won any of the states he has won so it is not fair to say she would have won these states had they campaigned. She won based on name not issues. So again are her motives in the best interest of voters are herself?

"There's no way of knowing how many voters didn't go to the polls because they knew their votes wouldn't be counted." That is their own fault for not showing up to vote; they should be held accountable for their non-action. People fight for the right to vote and they casually decide to not vote. The Florida Dems had no say in the primary date as the date is set by the Republican controlled Florida legislature. Why punish FL Dems for what FL Republicans set for the primary date? I'll be happy to vote McCain along with the other FL Dems to stand up to the DNC. No more bullying by the DNC and Obama supporters.

Comrade Dogsoldier: DNC rules keep FL and MI out, not Obama. As you may recall, Clinton stayed on the MI ballot, saying "oh, it's not going to matter anyhow". And now she wants MI to count, even though she was the only one on the ballot. Even you must agree this is absurd.

If not, please, comrade, tell me all about this new Soviet system for the proletariat to express its will...

Voters in Ohio were mislead by claims that the Obama Campaign had contacted the Canadian government about NAFTA. Now it turns out it was the Clinton Camapign.

There should be a do-over of the Ohio election. This whole thing is bringing back memories of the eight years of Clinton Sleaze.

Florida and Michigan MUST be given an opportunity to be heard and counted or this election will be meaningless. THE DNC WILL RECONSIDER or ELSE Lose Democrats to the other side! This al seems pretty contrived to me, who master minded this (Slick Willey?) There is still time to make the corrections. DEAN: You play games with this election and you WILL see BUSH III (McCain) in the White House. You’re going to alienate a lot of good Democrats! Stop screwing around!

Rules are rules folks. MI and FL do not count, no matter what Clinton says. She evidently will stop at nothing to steal this nomination.

The case for HRC to get nothing from the MI vote is cut and dried. Anyone saying otherwise is a fool or a scoundrel.

It would also be unfair to count FL: nobody can possibly disagree that Obama always does better in states where he has a chance to campaign. Texas - he was down 20 points, and 2 weeks later pulled even. Ohio, down 20, pulled nearly even before HRC's negative barrage.

Is the FL situation unfair because the republicans moved the primary? Yes, but both campaigns agreed not to contest it. Hillary had a head start, since she was the establishment-anointed candidate, so it's unfair to assume she earned the win.

The Michigan Primary was 55% Clinton to 40%. How is that a significant win? There were a lot of voters wanted anyone but Clinton to win. They either need to have a re-do or they not be counted. It would be unfair to all concerned if they are counted now.

maybe because 55% went Clinton and the rest was split between 4 people.

umm 1 + 5= 12 me obama supporter.

for all u people who think a caucas is the answer just look at the TX results, over 2 million voted in the primary , they barely broke 100K in the caucas. Thats including the reports in the dallas news about obama supporters locking the hillary supporters out of the buildings. There are police records of this showing up in dallas too. Caucassing should be ousted!

common sense - actually, Clinton did not agree with the removal of delegates from MI and FL before the voting began. So you are off base and misinformed if you think she is not concerned about the rights of the voters to have their voice heard.

Doesn't it seem a teeny bit hypocritical for the Obama supporters to accuse Hillary of "changing the rules" by attempting to seat delegates from MI and FL, while at the same time pushing to switch from primaries to caucuses in a re-vote so they have a better chance to win?

One reason I support Hillary is because she is so obviously willing to crawl over broken glass to become President. Anyone who wants it less doesn't deserve it, and won't give it their best once there (best example is G.W. Bush). Anyone who pretends to want it less is lying because they think it makes them look better (examples are Barack Obama and Fred Thompson).

Drew - i understand anger but you need to rethink your logic... you are mad at the republicans for moving the primaries knowing the democrats would be disenfranchised (they did not have to go through with it when the DNC said no)... but you are threatening to give your support to the republican nominee? lol

The statement that Obama ran ads in Fla. is a joke. He ran cable ads on National cable networks which broadcast everywhere, including Fla. Hillary went tio Fla. before the primary, claiming to be doing a fund raiser (wink, wink) and showed up after to claim victory. Quit trying to rewrite history.

There are only 2 choices here people. Either the states of FL and MI pay for new primaries or their citizen votes will not count. The rules were set well in advance of any states set their election days. FL and MI legislators chose to move their elections to dates prior to Feb 5th, which, by the RULES was against DNC policies. If MI and FL voters want to complain, then they should be revolting against their state government. This has nothing to do with Obama or the DNC. Hillary should be ashamed to not support the RULES of the party she seeks to be the nominee of, this is such a foolish argument. You guys are putting the blame on the wrong people. If you feel disenfranchised, set up marches and rallies, bring class action suits against the FL and MI government, use your energy on something that can bring about change in your states. For FL folks, what difference does it make anyway, your state gov will fix the vote for repubs anyway when the general election comes in Nov.

Dennis - Both Hillary AND Obama went to FL to raise money before the primary. That was specifically allowed per the DNC rules. So what if she went afterwards to claim victory, if Obama thought he was going to win he would have shown up to.

Chris, Give me a break, read the news from her events. They happend just before the vote. It was clearly a campaign event disguised as a fund raiser. Nobody was fooled.

If I've heard "rules are rules" once, I've heard it a dozen times.

Let's all agree that the rules were broken. What I object to is the decision to strip each state of its entire delegations.

The DNC Rules Committe took four months to determine how it was going to handle the rebellious states of Florida and Michigan.

Perhaps we should be objecting to the extreme consequences, when it would have been just as easy for the DNC to unseat just half of each state's delegation, or the strip the super delegates of voting rights, and/or prohibit state party leaders from holding important party positions or voting on important party matters for a term of 3-5 years.

Then you're punishing the folks who got Florida and Michigan into this mess, without penalizing its citizens of their right to vote.

This is all a game of chicken. There is a easy solution. Check out Oregon. They have votes by mail. It would not cost anywhere near $18 million and the Fla. and Mi. Demo parties could pay for it by having the Hillary and Obama campaigns send out an appeal to all their donors asking to help pay. If either camp refused to send out the appeal, we will know who really wants to disenfranchise voters.

If they don't do something to help FL they can kiss this election goodbye that is for sure, and it will be worse if Obama is the nominee he will never be able to win FL democrats, so he and his supporters can play fast and loose with this thinking he has it in the bag with his nonsense, he will not be able to win this election without FL.

Louis---
Thats a little bit lopsided. In Florida both candidates were on the ballot. Neither candidates campaigned. The public was aware of both circumstances.
The DNC should award the delegates based upon those facts, without spending the redo dollar. In Michigan neither candidate campaigned. Clinton was on the ballot Obama wasn't so Clinton had the advantage-spend the money for the redo.

The DNC needs to pay for the do overs, because they are the ones who decided to "punish" a couple of million people for something they had no control over. Especially in Florida, when it was a Republican administration who set the date for the Democratic primary. Maybe Howard Dean is another chauvanist who is afraid Hillary may pick up enough delegates from these two contests to pull ahead. After Dean self-destructed his own primary campaign, how did we end up with him as the head of the DNC? What moron made that decision?

Melanie---
Well it seems to me that all things were equal for the candidates in Florida and the public voted the way they wanted. Couldn't that one be left as it is?

They had control over it they voted for the dumb Florida Rebublicans thats there fault. There the one that moved up the elections not the DNC.

Boy oh boy and just think how America is going to be under a Hillary Clinton Administration. Wow! God help us.

I think whichever candidate pushes the hardest to get Florida and Michigan's delegation seated will be appreciated all the more for it.

Both the candidates and the people in those states are stuck with the decision of the respective state legislatures, the state party leaders and the DNC Rules Committee ruling.

By agreeing not to campaign, the candidates agreed to abide by the DNC's sanctions, but that should not be construed to mean that they agreed with the actual sanctioning decision.

I've read that the candidates who withdrew their names in Michigan, did so to show their support of the DNC decision, while those who left their name on the ballot simply agreed to abide by the sanctions, without agreeing with the DNC's actions.

Remember Dennis Kucinich was still in the race at that time, and he kept his name on the ballot, as did Senator Dodd if I'm not mistaken.

She creates a storm were ever she goes Ms. Conflict thats Hillary!

All you Obambites don't get it. But I'll help you out. Here what you need to know about the Clintons:

Rules apply to other people. Now you know. It is that simple, really.

Or as Brotha Machievelli tells us - "The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present."

Just remember this as you grapple with these gals (and some guys).

I don't Know.
Here in Arizona if you riot and burn they don't take names, they shoot your ###.

Also they would not let Independents vote in that election also according to C-Span

Here we go it's on now all hell is going to break out.

Boy oh boy and just think how America is going to be under a Hillary Clinton Administration. Wow! God help us. She creates a storm were ever she goes Ms. Conflict thats Hillary!

All hell should have broke out long before this. What difference should a day, week or month make to the DNC?

The citizens of Florida and Michigan certainly deserve to be represented at the Democratic convention.It would be outrageous to punish them because politicians in their states chose to have their primaries so early in the process.It is only fair that every state receive representation at the Republican and Democratic conventions.I fervently believe in liberty and democracy.If we want to maintain our republic, we need the participation of Americans from around the country.This includes the people of Florida and Michigan.It would go against the principles for which our nation stands to deny the citizens of Florida and Michigan delegates at the Democratic convention.

Can anybody tell me why the democratic party should have to foot the bill for something that is Fla.'s fault in the first place? They knew there would consequences if they moved their primaries up and now they want someone else to pay for it?

The way things now stand, nobody wants to pay for a revote in Florida. Unless someone steps up to the plate on that one, the DNC will have to certify the existing or they don't count at all. The whole thing is a rip for the Florida voters.

Fla. and Mich. voters were disenfranchised by there own state and party when they held an elections that violated the rules, were uncontested and in which the canidates were barred from campaigning. It is not a free election unless everyone participates and everyone can campaign. The Mich. and Fla. were no more free election than the Cuban or Russian elections. It is an insult to every voter in every other state that followed the rules to let the delagates chosen in an election that was not contested sit with delegates from free, contested elections.

I agree. (and maybe I should have clarified this earlier) I in no way blame this on the citizens in Fla. and Mi., but someone in those states knew that there would be repercussions. So if anyone should be blamed, shouldn't it be the persons in these states that were responsible for the move of the primary date?

Dennis, I agree with that up to this point. The circumstance was equal for
either candidate. The voters turned out in record numbers for Florida and they spoke. Michigan was a cluster screw and needs to be redone.

b.---
My point is can you justify spending 18M
on a revote in a state where neither candidate had an advantage?

Clinton hasn't been focused only on his foundation; since leaving the White House in 2001, he has billed major corporations and other organizations more than $41 million for speeches. Salon has assembled a list of the organizations by combing through his wife's Senate financial disclosure forms. Multiple speeches for one organization have been combined to show total payments to the former president. That list appears on the following page.
 
THERE SHOULD BE A LAW AGAINST PRESIDENTS BECOMING LOBBYIST

I agree that the states screwed up, so the states should have to pay for any revote.

And since its cheaper to caucus that's the way to go.

Louis, I agree. Every one should have their vote count, however, I doubt that the Democrat voters did not know their vote would not count that day. Why the state even spent the money or did not make certain they were within the DNC rules prior to the voting process tells me they did not concern themselves with voter's rights, at least not where the Primaries were concerned. And, isn't Gov. Christi of FL for Obama? And, a re-vote? Would that be fair?

Amazing how all of this is Hillary Clinton's fault! Get real, people, this is just another screw-up by the DNC and Howard Dean. And in Michigan, Hillary Clinton did not take her name off the ballot as did Obama and most others, because she said to do so was to disenfranchise the voters. How prophetic! Howard Dean and the DNC couldn't be doing the Republicans any more favors if they were on Karl Rove's payroll!!

I've already voted in FL and I will not vote again. Having another primary will only change the outcome because less people will vote. It peaves me that my vote didn't matter to begin with, so why would I want to vote again!

Whatever is decided, Florida needs to avoid the caucus circus.

Caucuses are the most worthless waste of time ever conceived.

The caucus mentality is akin to the commercial about herding cats.

They already voted once, and that is enough.

Just count the votes, and get on with it.

If Clinton wants every voto to count why is she opposed to a redo in Florida. "Clinton has told U.S. News and World Report that she opposes any sort of do-over for Florida and she would not accept it if Michigan were to hold a caucus."

Dennis - Obama did a fundraiser in FL the same day Clinton did. Both fundraisers were private events. Obama chose to buy national ads instead of ads just for the states he was supposed to. He willingly violated the rules.

Caucuses are the most undemocratic form of voting offered here in the USA. Texas proved it's a circus; and, Washington state goes to show you how caususes drastically misrepresent the will of the people.

You can't unring the bell in Florida or Michigan! LET THEIR VOTES COUNT AND MOVE ON; OTHERWISE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE DISGRUNTLED DEMOCRATS NOT ONLY IN FL & MI, BUT HERE'S ON IN PA THAT WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN IN THE FALL!

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH AND THE DNC IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A PARTY LEFT AT THE END OF THIS BETTER GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER!

Let's paint another scenario... a sta