Howard, This Is Not About You, This Is About Your Country

Howard Dean has kicked off this meeting with a great speech. He emphasized the superb turnout Democrats have had this year. And he emphasized how strong we are to be able come together and disagree.

He condemned the sexist and racist statements made over the course of the primary. When he said, "on the part of the media" there were some grumblings.

He then told a story about when he was running for President. He was really really angry at what the Democratic Party had done. And he was ranting. (I imagine it went something like Argghhhhhh!!) And then Al Gore called. It took him about 20 minutes, but finally, Gore said, "Howard, this is not about you, this is about your country."

The speech made me proud to own a orange cap from Iowa.

Oh, and then he said, "we have to honor the voters who turned out, and also those voters who didn’t turn out in MI."

I got a lot of stares, up here in the media seats, for clapping loudly.

It was a good speech. We did good when we elected that man.

image_print
233 replies
  1. perris says:

    We did good when we elected that man.

    I don’t know who you mean, dean for head of our party of gore for president but it doesn’t matter, I agree wholeheartedly

  2. BoxTurtle says:

    Maybe I’m undercaffiniated or just stupid, but I really don’t understand this Kabuki. Nothing is going to happen that will change the current standings, this entire clusterf*ck should be over by next Wednesday afternoon at the latest. So why the big fight? Is it all about attitudes in Novemeber in those two critical states, the DNC has to prove they care?

    Boxturtle (Confused as to what Hillary expects to gain)

    • RevDeb says:

      Can’t speak for this crew but in church the “process” is as important as the “product.” In order to move forward on any item of contention it has to be talked out otherwise people don’t feel they have been heard and go off in a huff. At least if it is a clean process they have less to complain about.

      • BoxTurtle says:

        I see that point and I agree. But that’s from the states viewpoints. What’s Hillary trying to get out of this? She has to know that whatever comes out will not be something that will change the end result.

        So why is she so desperate? She’d have to get all the delegates for herself to make a difference and she’s known that won’t happen for months.

        Boxturtle (Hillary is smart, she has a plan. But I can’t figure it out)

        • RevDeb says:

          Sadly even though this is not about Hillary, she has chosen to make everything about Hillary. Or at least that’s my reading. Wish it weren’t.

          • siri says:

            C’est vrais.
            and it IS sad.
            heart breaking if you are a life long feminist, like me.
            good morning, RevDeb.

              • siri says:

                I hope your day is smooth and all gets done. but you will be missed through this k-wrap.
                yours is always the calming voice in here.

                  • NorskeFlamethrower says:

                    1,859 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

                    Citizen barbara:

                    “..well Rev Deb’s and NorskeFlamethroer’s.”

                    Why thank you, Sister barbara but I think Rev Deb is the glue that holds one of wheels on this bus.

                    KEEP THE FAITH AND LISTEN, BY THEIR WORDS YOU SHALL REALLY KNOW THEM!!

              • Adie says:

                Hey RevDeb, relax and know it’s in good hands. I imagine you’ll check in on occasion? Go in peace, knowing good-hearted, smart puppies are on the case.
                The gang around here doesn’t seem to miss much, especially with Marcy and Jane at the head of the pack. ;->

                • RevDeb says:

                  I know it’s in good hands. It’s hard for me to discipline myself to stay away though. And as for a calming presence, ask Mr. Rev. how I behave in front of the teevee during KO or other news casts. I don’t think he would used the word calming. Or ask scarecrow. He’s been around me enough to know.

                  Interesting seeing the rogues gallery of the DNC on teevee.

                  • Adie says:

                    Understood on perhaps more levels than you can possibly imagine! Mr. Adie would give a guffaw if he saw your comment. It’s eerily similar here.

                    I hope your work today goes smoothly. Thanks for all that you do. You are indeed a gift to this crazy pack. Always enjoy your thotful comments.

                    P. E. A. C. E.

          • IrishJIm says:

            Amen. I am burnt out on the cherry picking of rules. The twisted logic. The divisive rhetoric. The wanting to changes the rules only in order to self serve. I thought Democrats were better than this.

      • bmaz says:

        RevDeb – When you study the history and theory of Constitutional law, as evinced not only in the Constitution itself, but as described in the Federalist Papers and other contemporaneous history, you learn that the whole ball of wax is about the primacy of the process, not the individual person or result.

        • RevDeb says:

          yep. Or at least it seems to have been until this maladministration chose to hide the process or subvert it at every turn.

          Oh for a total housecleaning that brings us back to the rule of law having meaning. Please.

    • emptywheel says:

      You can’t get to Wednesday’s or Friday’s resolution without first going through this process. So it is mostly kabuki, but it’s kabuki that has to happen before we get into the stuff that matters again.

    • bigbrother says:

      Seen it as an opportunity to diffuse the angst from the campaigns and theirstaff and move to a umiteds General Election. This is an opportunity to get the party on the same page and lose the baggage. When all agree there should be no more devisiveness. Its about Americas future and implementing an agenda to get work done. Just sayin.

      • BoxTurtle says:

        This is an opportunity to get the party on the same page and lose the baggage

        This makes sense. I guess I understand why it needs to be a Big Deal rather than just a few phone calls. Still don’t see why Camp Clinton is fighting so hard, but maybe that’s just Hillary. One of the things I like about her is she’s a never say die fighter.

        Boxturtle (Kabuki is fun to watch on occasion)

        • emptywheel says:

          Well, and as I was saying to someone who was more involved in this process than me, the problem is Obama can’t make all the obvious moves until Hillary concedes. So you’ve got to go through this, get a final number, and then we can go forward.

          • BoxTurtle says:

            Do you think Clinton will conceed after this meeting or will she continue to try to switch Super D’s?

            I still feel like we’re spending entirely too much time doing things other than going after McBush.

            Boxturtle (Enemy of my enemy is my friend)

            • JMorgan says:

              Quit? Clinton is spending her summer vacation trying to poach pledged delegates, in addition to superdelegates.

              She’s already said it.

              • noblejoanie says:

                Not to sound snarky, but would you describe superdelegates who switched from HRC to BO as “poached”?

                • siri says:

                  She did THAT to herself. After all she’s done, i don’t blame them and I don’t consider them “poached”. I consider them as having come to reality.

            • emptywheel says:

              No. She’ll concede after enough supers commit to Obama on Wednesday and Thursday to give him the win, even with MI and FL seated in full. Then she’ll concede.

              • Hugh says:

                No. She’ll concede after enough supers commit to Obama on Wednesday and Thursday to give him the win, even with MI and FL seated in full. Then she’ll concede.

                Merely out of curiosity, what do you base this on?

        • siri says:

          Well and that’s the CRUX of this primary. I don’t WANT a fighter. i think we NEED a peace maker. and as for her “never say die”, that does not apply to the millions of people in Iran, I guess.
          sorry,
          pax

        • barbara says:

          This is an opportunity to get the party on the same page and lose the baggage

          Another way is to hold this meeting on a Northwest Airlines plane.

  3. juslin says:

    it’ll be interesting to see how this is going to be settled without bitterness……

    • perris says:

      i like to think there are Founding Fathers there, in spirit.

      well, we do know they are not resting in their graves since the republicans highjacked their country in the coup we now suffer

      I suppose they are indeed there right now

  4. al75 says:

    Can the Dems grow up, and be a real political movement, that isn’t “about” any one person? That’s one of the questions at issue today. Our hopes are resting on the answer.

  5. bmaz says:

    Top of the morning to you and Jane. Keep making noise. Have to admit, I too am unclear on the actors and timing in your post. Was Dean ranting this morning and Gore called in live while you were there, or was Dean telling the story of having been ranting in the past and Gore called him with the “it’s about the country” words and this is the uplifting story Dean told to you all (my vote)?

    Either way the orange cap is good; you wearing those matching sandals??

    • katymine says:

      Dean was talking about his loss in 2004 and his anger with the Democratic Party and Gore called him and said it is not about Dean but about America…

  6. AppleCanyon2 says:

    Are there any protestors out in the streets?
    Anything happening on that front. I know that BO did not want protestors but did anyone show up with an OBAMA shirt to protest?

    • katymine says:

      Pictures of protesters are over at AmericaBlog and it is my understanding that the Obama campaign asked his supporters not to protest, to leave the HRC protesters alone…..

  7. Kevster says:

    Hey Marcy:

    Obama can afford to give up quite a few delegates and still win just to get the MI and FL issue settled. MI will be stickier because of the uncommitted vote. It’s pretty galling that when HRC thought she had this thing in the bag that she agreed to the sanctions. Now that she’s behind she is acting like Joan of Arc-it’s disgraceful.

    Is there any indication that Dean has a canvass of the remaining SDs? I have to believe that he already knows how this will play out.

    • BoxTurtle says:

      Is there any indication that Dean has a canvass of the remaining SDs? I have to believe that he already knows how this will play out.

      I think EVERYBODY already knows how this will play out. Obama will win the nomination, Hillary will return to the senate. That’s why this confuses me so, it should be able to be handled in a conference call at most.

      If it was behind closed doors, I’d think that Camp Clinton was bargaining for future advantage as the price for taking their beating like a lady.

      Boxturtle (She’s not doing much that would make me support her in the future)

  8. siri says:

    this is going to be long and boring, i can’t see hanging with this for hours. i want to, but only have so much patience!

  9. jayt says:

    well duh. It (finally) occurred to me that any state with a republican-controlled state legislature and/or electorate can cause a state’s Democratic Party to be in violation of the party’s rules, and quite deliberately wreak havoc by way of forcing the DNC to impose sanctions on that state’s Democratic Party, by voting to move its state primary to a date sometime before the first Tuesday of February.

    I’m therefore surprised that there are only two states in play today.

  10. Adie says:

    Good Morning Jane, Marcy and Pups.

    It just doesn’t get much better than this. I have no connection to Iowa except you, Marcy. Makes me proud anyway.

    It just feels good to have you fellas watching the store.

    Thank you both!

    • MrWhy says:

      I know that Marcy was/is a Dean supporter, and the Dean Scream took place after the Iowa caucuses, but what beyond that is her connection with Iowa? She’s a Michigander AFAIK.

      • emptywheel says:

        I went to IA to canvass for Dean when he was still winning. Those who did that got orange stocking caps to keep them warm. Someday it’s going to be worth big money, but right now mr. emptywheel and McCaffrey the MilleniaLab fight over it.

      • Adie says:

        I haven’t a clue, other than her comment above in the post.

        The speech made me proud to own a orange cap from Iowa.

        It’s as simple as this: If she’s happy, I’m happy!

        She’s one of my heroines in this difficult world. Thas’ all. ;->

  11. siri says:

    Yes! Thank you so much Marcy, for being there! And don’t you worry one bit about any stares. you have MANY people at your back, you are clapping loudly for ALL of us, at FDL and friends! You do what you do. That’s the best anyone’s going to get from live blogs and we GOT your back!

  12. siri says:

    i do not like this guy. this is NOT about Clinton, or it shouldn’t be.
    i don’t trust him, and he’s going up my spine.

  13. hdshrnkr says:

    Such feelings exist on either side there needs to be substance AND ceremony to fix them I think. I posted this to Driftglass’ “its all over but the shouting” because I really want a team of smart (and probably female) bloggers to build a series of stepping stones through the rubble for the lost Hilary supporters to pick there way back, and I think both of these posts are part of it. Thanks for being there.

    Tell me, though, what do we do about our loved ones who are trapped under the fallen beams of the Clinton campaign? They are like lost miners and we have to get them out. I have a dear dear woman whose heart is a democratic tiger, that is of an age where Hilary’s candidacy was the direct result of her march on washington and bra burning nearly forty years ago. How do I build her a bridge into this democratic party that she can cross safely?

    She sees the way strewn with broken glass, which she no doubt will pick her way through with distaste and possible terror. I want some brilliant writer, like you, drifty, to line it with fur and feathers so that her bare feet can come over to the other side in safety.

    I would wager we all have one or two friends trapped in a similar state. Help us find the right tools to rescue them and bring the enormous value only they have access too.

    As we struggle to release the bathwater of democracy, how can we keep the baby?

  14. katymine says:

    So what kind of cheese does this guy want with his whine?

    poor suffering guy…. poor poor guy…

  15. siri says:

    This is a horrific clusterf*(X$! At the most wrong time in American history. I can’t believe this is happening THIS YEAR!
    *SIGH*

    • katymine says:

      Actually I really like that this is open and seen both on CSPAN & MSNBC… that the goings on in the Democratic party is out in the open and full view to us….. NOT in some back room just between the guys… (with or without smoke)

      • Adie says:

        yes, nice, but be wary of MSNBC. They have a nasty, long-standing habit of cutting away from real action to cover pretty much anything that’s “breaking news”. Worse, sometimes the trolls there try to explain instead of cover what’s going on. Can be infuriating.

        • katymine says:

          I moved over to Cspan when MSNBC kept up their blather over the DNC Pledge of Allegiance …. which I found to be rude and just wrong…

            • Adie says:

              still, i share your pleasure that MSNB is carrying it at least in some capacity. It shows they’re gonna admit something’s happening. And with their foibles of late, not to mention earlier, they better get things right this time, harumph.

  16. nomolos says:

    Late to the party here. Anything settled yet (lunch time, recess for massage, length of toilet breaks) or are we still deciding if it is better to return to the smoke filled back room?

  17. siri says:

    so, was that, recapping here:
    “We’ve been so beat up on by Rethugs, and they’ve been so mean to us, that we should get to break rules!”
    We’re ENTITLED to favors and perks!
    ???

  18. katymine says:

    So what does having your vote count as intended have to do with FL violating very clear and specific rules within the party?

    So this orange is just like that apple over there?

  19. CTBob says:

    Notwithstanding the proceedings, I’m very pleased to see this televised for all to see. Transparency is a good thing. Our party is making me proud. Even if the reason for this spectacle is unfortunate.

  20. joejoejoe says:

    How about a little cheese with that whine Sen. Nelson.

    I’m a Democratic voter in Florida and it was well publicized that the ballot didn’t count. You’ll also not hear Sen. Nelson talk about a huge property tax ballot initiative.

    I was heard loud and clear when the FL Democratic committee send an email asking what path to take and I responded “Don’t move the date! Don’t move the date!”.

  21. GeorgeSimian says:

    I think it was an insanely bad decision to unseat the delegates in FL and MI, but once it was done, why aren’t they just sticking with it? This is the wishy-washy attitude that Democrats are always accused of, and it’s true half the time. This time it’s definitely true.

  22. GeorgeSimian says:

    I don’t get what the big deal was in the first place. Who cares if they moved their primaries forward?

  23. katymine says:

    Now we are serving individual whine to every voter from FL…. what does this have to do with the state of FL violating the rules…..

    Somehow I go to a saying of “throwing sand into the umpires eyes” with this line of bull…

  24. Loo Hoo. says:

    Huffpo is reporting that Florida has been decided.

    Two sources, including a high-ranking official with the Florida delegation, have confirmed that the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee reached an agreement last night and will seat the state’s entire delegation but give each delegate half a vote. The result would be a net gain of 19 delegates for Sen. Hillary Clinton, though no word yet on how the superdelegates from the state will be allocated. It is, the official says, a compromise that Sen. Barack Obama will be willing to make. “There will be theater but not much fight.”

  25. JMorgan says:

    Dear Senator Nelson,

    There are 4.2 million registered Democrats in Florida, and they were all told the election wasn’t going to count. I am unimpressed with your argument that 1.7 million then should have their votes counted. 2.5 million of Florida Democrats have had their votes suppressed by Florida State Representatives voting unanimously to move the date of the primary up. A Florida Democrat introduced the legislation in the first place. When Florida Democratic Representatives voted for that legislation, they were consciously trading away their constituents’ rights to vote in the primary to have (the overall legislation) paper ballots in the general election.

    FLorida’s citizens have a legitimate beef, but it is with their own state representatives.

  26. siri says:

    so, inal, BUT
    why didn’t the Dem leaders just FIRE the FL Dem leaders and solve that problem and not disengage the people of FL???
    That would have sent a message about rule changing!
    And there would be no one disenfranchised.

  27. katymine says:

    So WHO told the voters in FL that their vote would not count?

    WHO is responsible for telling people to stay home?

    • JMorgan says:

      Interestingly, both Republican state politicians and Democratic state politicians.

      Voters clearly got the message when all of the candidates for national office (Clinton, Obama, etc.) signed the pledge announcing that they wouldn’t campaign in the states that moved up their primaries and, as we’ve all heard the tape, Clinton is also on tape in an NPR interview saying, these elections “won’t count.”

        • Adie says:

          perceived self-interest is a powerful force to reckon with.

          hopefully they won’t end up having to drag her kicking & screaming…

          Bill either. *sigh*

  28. Adie says:

    Let us pause just a moment to send deep THANKS to our noble, gifted techies, who successfully reamed out and relined the toobz yestidie.

    Hear! Hear!, Hats off to ((((Tech Support))))!!! ;->

  29. CTBob says:

    No matter what the result is today, I can’t imagine that it’ll much change the likelihood that the fight for the nomination will be officially over in about a week or so.

    For the record, I’m fine with seating some delegates from FL and MI. Look at how the Republicans punished MI for moving up their primary; they too half their delegates. Nobody complained about that. It probably would have saved a lot of trouble had the DNC issued a similar punishment back in December, rather than go all in.

      • CTBob says:

        I’m thinking after the dust from the primaries settles, a lot of the undecided supers are going to cast in with Obama. He’ll hit the threshold shortly after the final primaries.

        • JMorgan says:

          Whatever a SD says prior to the convention isn’t going to end this. Until that vote is cast at the convention, it can be changed, as we’ve seen this last week with the SD from the Virgin Isles who was for Clinton before he was against her (for Obama), and last week was back for Clinton again.

          Clinton has already said that pledged delegates are also “fair game”. She’s going to spend the summer, under the radar, working on all of the delegates. And with her surrogates, like what we learned a couple of weeks ago, Haim Saban trying to “tempt” (bribe) delegates with $1 million.

          Unless she actually says “I concede, I quit” (and everything she’s said and done, like today with demonstrators showing up from 26 states, indicates she’s not going to do that), this is going to floor of the convention.

          • CTBob says:

            No, I agree. She has the option to continue the battle after Obama gets a clear majority of the delegates.

            But I expect Hillary will abide by the majority, rather than indulge in a long, protracted, ugly delegate fight right up to and during the convention. This is just my opinion, so I may be wrong. We’ll have to wait and see.

            • Petrocelli says:

              I hope you’re right for the good of the party but everything I’ve seen tell me otherwise ..

            • rwcole says:

              Obama CAN’T get a clear majority unless one counts super delegates and they can change their minds…

              There can really be no absolute clarity until the convention, although Dean and others will try to come as close as humanly possible.

              The right solution will make it clear that Obama is the presumptive nominee and that he will bear the standard.

              In the meantime- Hillary reserves the right to lobby superdelegates behind the scenes in case Obama steps on his dick- but no public controversy.

        • barbara says:

          My laundry is creeping out of the laundry room, begging for a good soak, and laundry woman is attached to her keyboard. Again. Already. Still.

          • Adie says:

            dear sweet mr adie knows it does no good attall attall to fret while the mrs is at the Lake. I suspect he has lots of long-suffering company out there alongside all us pups.

            • barbara says:

              Once in a while, when I tell David what Christy, Emptywheel, perris, elliott, etc. have to say about things, he looks at me in the same strange way parents look at children who have imaginary friends. *g*

                • siri says:

                  same conversaton here from mr. siri.
                  i’m alone in this within this house.
                  makes him crazy, but i hang with his Laker’s games, so he can’t say TOO much.
                  hehe

                  • Adie says:

                    ;->, one of our sonny’s bein’ a whiz of a techie hisownself, poppa-adie is very much aware of reasons for, and appreciative of, creative monikers in general. I’m one of the few here to be so in-yer-face boldly stoopid in my choice – of name, that is. the mr. is a prize, as are the kidz. I feel spoiled rotten around here. ;->

                    • Adie says:

                      -um- “here” bein’ HERE here at my real brick-&-mortar home (who’m i kiddin’ – aluminum schtick)

  30. katymine says:

    Fact check needed….. DID Democrats in FL vote to move up the primary?
    I heard that that they did….

    • JMorgan says:

      Yes Florida’s State Democrats voted for the bill in which moving up the date was included. Nobody tricked them.

    • Loo Hoo. says:

      Yes, but it was tied to a paper trail on the voting machines. Republican state gov and governor refused an amendment to move the primary back.

      • siri says:

        Thank you Loo Hoo. I’ve been wondering about that and with so much going on, I didn’t take time to research exactly what happened.

      • juslin says:

        wow! you must know me…. did that many times lol… and yes this is ahem – more entertaining….. hopefully resolved as well…

        • Adie says:

          we got 2 “boyz” in their 30’s. and, besides, their ma never has been thoroughly citified and tamed either. *blush*

          jus’ tell yerself yer sacrificing for yer country and the future of the whole dang world. TRUE! eh?

  31. siri says:

    Why aren’t they asking Marcy??? WHY do they have to ask Chuck and Andrea ANYTHING???
    MSM is SOOOOOO early 2000.

    • Adie says:

      I warned ya way up at #69! When will you EVER learn!?! *g*

      Suggest u switch to C-Span just to keep shut’s left of yer sanity.

      • siri says:

        i JUST did that one second before I refreshed and read your no. 127.
        lol
        I’ll TRY and pay more attention in the future.

    • emptywheel says:

      Chuck and Andrea are, I think, not even in the room. they’re just in the lobby outside.

      Btw, Byron is here. I’m wondering whether I should pick a fight over McClellan all but confirming that Bush authorized Plame’s outing.

      • BoxTurtle says:

        Btw, Byron is here. I’m wondering whether I should pick a fight over McClellan all but confirming that Bush authorized Plame’s outing.

        If you do, i’ll donate $50 in your name to the local food bank.

        Boxturtle (And I’ll mail you the receipt for tax purposes)

      • siri says:

        Well, you have MY blessings, just don’t miss anything on the floor. YOU are my eyes and ears here and I been WAITING for this since forever……
        lol

      • Petrocelli says:

        Marcy V Byron is a very unfair fight IMO … those in the MSM have all powers of objective thought surgically removed, lest they go off the talking points …

  32. joejoejoe says:

    Here’s the letter I got from the Florida Democratic Party on June 17, 2007:

    Dear Florida Democrats,
    You spoke…
    …and your Party listened.
    As Chair of your Party, I am proud to officially announce that Florida’s Democratic Presidential Preference Primary will be held on January 29, 2008, in accordance with a new state law and the will of Florida’s Democratic voters.
    Although Democratic National Committee (DNC) rules can penalize states (except for Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina) that hold 2008 primaries prior to February 5, the Florida Democratic Party’s leadership determined that holding a process outside the state-run January 29th election would be detrimental to the voters of this state.
    We did not come to this decision on our own.
    Over the past few months, the Party discussed the issue with the DNC, Democratic Presidential candidates, Democratic leaders in Florida, and committed Florida Democrats like you. We read your emails and letters, and, in the end, a clear consensus emerged.
    Florida Democrats made it clear that a date other than January 29th would potentially disenfranchise voters and inhibit preparations for a winning 2008 campaign – a campaign that will deliver the state’s 27 crucial electoral votes on November 4, 2008 to the Democratic Presidential nominee.
    Also, we all know the importance of November, but the January 29 elections will affect the people of Florida as well, with important municipal races on the ballot in many cities, and a statewide property tax constitutional amendment that threatens county budgets and local jobs.
    As the Florida Democratic Party, we cannot and will not support disenfranchisement that could occur if our primary were held on a date other than January 29, 2008. Our state has seen far too much of this in the past.
    Also, we agree with many of you who wrote and e-mailed us with concerns that holding a separate, later election would take our eyes off the prize and adversely affect the progress made toward winning the state for the Democratic nominee in 2008. Like you’ve said, there’s just too much at stake.
    Because of these reasons, the Florida Democratic Party has respectfully requested that the DNC not enact penalties on our state or Democratic Presidential candidates by diluting the Florida delegation’s voting strength. The Delegation Selection Plan we submitted to the DNC is available online at http://www.fladems.com/delegateplan until July 20 for your comments.
    We will keep you posted as the discussions with the DNC continue.
    Thank you for your trust.
    Sincerely,
    Karen L. Thurman
    Congresswoman Karen L. Thurman
    Chair, Florida Democratic Party

    Notice the mention of the 27 EVs in Florida? It’s been a bigfoot process from the beginning. The EVs have ZERO to do with the DNC process. It’s as though Florida thinks that it’s OK if THEY move their date…but the precedent of Delaware moving their primary and getting sanctioned is irrelevant.

    More here.

  33. juslin says:

    a question…. why weren’t these questions brought up before it was decided on the rules…. thats what i dont get….. why now?

    • SouthernDragon says:

      I don’t think anyone anticipated FL and MI moving their datesat the time. The Dems in FL did not have enough votes to stop the Rethug led legislature from moving the dates. I’ve always thought the Rethugs did it on purpose to create chaos. The Dems, in their idiocy, figured since they were going to lose the date change fight they might as well get a statewide paper ballot requirement added to the bill. The counties were already under pressure from voters to get rid of the electronic machines so a paper ballot everywhere was in the wind anyhow. It would have taken longer going county by county but it would have gotten done. In the FL Dem party “it’s all about me.” Karen Thurman is a sorry excuse for a state party chairman.

  34. siri says:

    Marcy, isn’t it common sense and fair that if they redo this “sanction” and seat delegates from FL and MI, then they also need to hold new elections in both of those states???
    A re-do should be a total re-do, right?

    • barbara says:

      Saints preserve us. Bottom line question here? If Obama and Clinton agreed to observe the “penalty” phase re MI and FL, how in the name of chad has this become today’s firestorm? Rhetorical, I suppose, but even now, I just don’t get it. Met a MI activist at Take Back America in March. She said she believed things should be left as they are. Rules is rules, dealie. Except…when they’re breakable. This feels so Bushian to me.

      • siri says:

        oh it IS Bu$hiness all over the place! That’s what’s so sad. I believe it’s a trickle down of this entire illegal misAdministration, and i don’t think they even recognize that dynamic.
        ok
        this female speaking now, don’t know her name, in the red, needs to stfu by now!

    • JMorgan says:

      Obviously, take this as just my opinion, but, you cannot recreate the conditions of that time:

      1) The candidates who were in the race at that time OTHER than Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (Joe Biden, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich) are no longer in the race. Only Hillary Clinton and Dennis Kucinich kept their names on the Michigan ballot.

      2) Michigan was an open primary, John McCain had yet to sew up the nomination on the Republican side, Rush Limbaugh had yet to launch Operation Chaos against the Democrats, but Michigan Democrats, knowing that their election wasn’t going to count launched their own Operation Chaos in the Republicans’ primary.

      3) Florida has 4.2 million registered Democrats. 1.7 million of them voted. Not only were politicians throughout the state telling Floridians that the election was not going to count, so was Senator Clinton.

      If we in the other states are to reconsider and overlook Michigan’s and Florida’s bad faith acts of refusing to abide by what all other states adhered to, it further damages the votes of Democrats in the other states who aren’t getting the chance to reconsider their own votes this late in the game – Particularly those who cast votes for one of the other candidates who dropped out. (According to the latest polling, if California voters could vote again, Obama would win.)

    • SouthernDragon says:

      Costs too much money. It’s being hashed about but the bottom line is the prohibitive cost.

  35. joejoejoe says:

    FL Dems outvoted by the Republicans means…

    The Florida House voted unanimously 118-0.
    Florida Senate voted 37-2 to move the date. The 2 nays weren’t Dems.

    The FL primary had record turnout because it used to be held after the primary was already effectively decided.

  36. eyesonthestreet says:

    I am listening to Joyner, why not admit the mistake made at the state leg level, apologize to the voters and accept the consequences, but no, that is not possible, lets trun the whole thing into being victims?

  37. IrishJIm says:

    I was disgusted by the AUSMEN guy and his playing “the victim” of the big bad Republicans. Especially since the Florida Democratic party was told in March of 2007 that they could have $ from the DNC to hold a special election of their own if the GOP moved the Florida primary up prior to Feb. 5. They arrogantly chose not to. Now they want to play the victims of the GOP. Hogwash.

    • Adie says:

      here. have some a this here “cheesy whine”. Brand new on the market, all handy in a squirt can. Funny. Tastes as if it’s been on the shelf way past its date tho.

  38. joejoejoe says:

    EW, pick a fight! Pick a fight!

    And tell Andrea Mitchell to thank her husband for the housing bubble. Asshat.

    • AZ Matt says:

      Hell, ask Andrea about Alan’s suport for Charles Keating’s Lincoln Savings & Loan.

  39. katymine says:

    did they bring all their straw men by the one ton Uhaul truck load along with the whine….?

  40. JMorgan says:

    Florida’s State Democrats voted UNANIMOUSLY for the legislation moving the date up.

    • Adie says:

      they also were on the verge of stopping the 2000 recount by theirveryown decree, when the supremes made them superfoolouses.

      does ANY state have a decent state lege? just wonderin’…

    • SouthernDragon says:

      Yes they did. To them the paper ballot issue was important. In discussions in the legislature the Dems made it plain they would not vote for the date change bill unless a paper ballot requirement was added to it. The Dems were bound and determined to get something out of the legislation. The Rethugs had nothing to lose by adding it to the bill. Paper ballot issues in the counties was not a concern they had. The Dems crowed about the paper ballot while Dem voters got screwed.

      • JMorgan says:

        We have ALL gotten screwed in one way or other. That’s what democracy is about, getting to 50% plus 1 vote, and that’s not going to get everybody everything that will make them happy.

        The people of Florida got paper ballots for the general election and all future elections – that’s the trade they made, and they got it through the lawful process of their democratic republic. Their elected representatives made that deal for them, on their behalf.

        • SouthernDragon says:

          So the FL Dems got no bitch. I couldn’t agree more. Tell that to Karen Thurman. This wasn’t done in a vacuum. The state party thought they could manipulate the national party rules and it’s not working out quite like they thought it would.

  41. LindaR says:

    I think it’s better to reward the voters who did their duty and voted despite being told their vote didn’t count than to reward the people who gave up and didn’t vote.

    I used to say don’t count any of them — they broke the rules. But the voters didn’t break the rules. The party hacks broke the rules.

    Now, I say count every vote that was cast.

    • JMorgan says:

      I can’t disagree more.

      We’re a democratic republic. We’ve gotten into this mess partially because of citizens who do not vote in their own best interests. After the 2000 election, why are ANY citizens who aren’t in the top .02% of wealth voting for Republicans?

      If Florida’s and Michigan’s votes are included, it dilutes all other states’ voters votes. They leapfrogged over states in a process determined after all states had the opportunity to weigh in. As a Californian, by the time that my state got to vote, my preferred candidate had already dropped out. Why should Floridians get rewarded for thumbing their noses at a process that I adhered to and hasn’t served me as I would have preferred.

      I think this is outrageous. I think the analogy of rewarding a child having a tantrum is an accurate one.

    • Phoenix Woman says:

      Linda: The problem is that In MI many people voted “uncommitted” and did NOT want to vote for Hillary. Hillary wants to count those people as having voted for her.

      In addition, Michigan’s Democratic leadership, such as it is, has been doing this crap forever. (Michigan sucks so badly at primaries that they actually stopped having them for much of the 1980s and 1990s.)

      They tried the illegal early primary in 1980 — and Carter and Kennedy, doing what is the standard response for major presidential candidates confronted with primary shenanigans, pulled their names from the ballot. Result: Michigan was the only state Jerry Brown won in the 1980 primary.

      They tried it again in 2000 — and again, Gore and Bradley, doing what is the standard response for major presidential candidates confronted with primary shenanigans, pulled their names from the 2000 ballot, which meant that the votes were split largely between “Uncommitted” and Lyndon LaRouche. Rather than be faced with giving LaRouche delegates, the MI Dem leaders quickly organized a caucus, which Gore won, and which allowed their delegates to be seated at the convention that summer.

      Carl Levin tried to try it again in 2004, but Terry McAuliffe, then the head of the DNC, made him back down by threatening to yank his delegates. (McAuliffe, ironically, now works for Hillary and so backs whatever she wants at the time. In the fall, before she lost in Iowa, it was that Michigan be punished. Ever since the Iowa loss, it’s been to do a 180 on his 2004 position.)

    • MrWhy says:

      Bottom line, a compromise is needed. Your suggestion isn’t a compromise, it’s a capitulation to HRC’s campaign.

  42. JMorgan says:

    In my opinion, and wouldn’t it be terrific (for me) if I ruled the world [ ], the Democratic voters of Florida and Michigan can vote in November, like the rest of us who believe we have been cheated terribly by the gamesmanship of political operatives ruining this democracy.

  43. nomolos says:

    Are there any “real” people on that committee or is everyone a party insider? Any “citizens” seated?

  44. hazmaq says:

    First, it isn’t a coincidence that the same people who now slam the DNC Rules, and Howard Dean in particular, were were the same ones who threw Howard under the bus the day after he finally edged the Democrats into winning an election, and are in fact Hillary Clinton and all of her DLC supporters. Damn those ‘activists’ has been her yell since Lieberman got busted.

    Second, I watched the 2007 DNC Rules meeting last night on c-span.
    One item of fact missing in all of Floridas rhetoric today about that Jan. 29 election?

    What did Floridians say back then? They weren’t worried about being dis-enfranchised back then, because the “nominee will surely seat us at the convention.”
    But today,they just don’t like the nominee.

    In today’s discussion they also eliminated all mentions of the ‘other’ item that happened to be on the Jan. 29 ballot besides the Presidential nominees: a property tax reduction that would have cut a whole host of items precious to Democrats. In last years meeting Florida Democrats said their get out the vote efforts were going to be massive “to defeat that Republican bill” even if the candidates votes weren’t going to count. They weren’t worried about the Presidential votes – the “nominee will fix those..”
    Turnout was not that large compared to every other state, but was more for the taxes, not the Presidents Senator Nelson, you lying bastard.!

    I hope Clinton and Florida are justly punished for their deceits, again.

  45. Phoenix Woman says:

    “The Doctor is in!”

    Howard may not have got to be king, but he — and through him, the rest of us — got to be kingmakers.

    He is doing what he needs to be doing right now.

  46. yonodeler says:

    I hope the party deciders realize they would not only be setting a precedent by softening the penalty against the two early states, they might even be creating an incentive for a “can’t get no respect” state with a favorite son to move itself to the front of the primary line, garnering more attention that way. Maybe no state legislature would ever go that route, but I don’t know.

  47. Petrocelli says:

    “We have to honor the voters who turned out, and also those voters who didn’t turn out in MI.” – Dean

    I would add that they have to honor the other states that played by the rules. Looking at these three issues simultaneously would allow for a fair agreement; ignoring any of them would result in a bigger clusterf*ck in 2012.

    • Phoenix Woman says:

      Exactly.

      For my money, the best solution would be for both parties (because guess what? The Republicans have had to regularly punish THEIR obstreporous state parties, too) to adopt The American Plan, which while letting the small states go first, rotates them so no one state becomes the decider for all of us. All states have equal power under this plan.

  48. rwcole says:

    The political science types can compute within an eyelash what the results would have been if the vote had properly done…The candidates should agree to that number plus or minus a few and be done with this. Obama wins ANYWAY.

  49. JMorgan says:

    Alice Germond, if you want to go down that lane, how many of the 4.2 million Democratic voters owned property?

  50. rwcole says:

    Hillary said to get 19 incremental delegates out of the Florida compromise. They seem to want to do Michigan 50-50. It’s probably close enough for government work.

  51. rwcole says:

    I’m getting the skeleton page with purple print and no graphics…Happens a lot lately to me. Anyone else?

  52. rwcole says:

    Obama has this thing nailed down. The right thing for him to do is to bend over backwards to be fair to Hillary voters- he needs em badly in November. If anyone’s gonna get tough with Hillary- let it be Dean.

  53. JMorgan says:

    If this goes through, if there is any compromise, I guarantee you that states like mine (California, biggest state, most populous state) are going to leapfrog, too, come the next election cycle, expecting full well that whatever the penalty, it will be overturned.

    No wonder we liberals are perceived as being lax parents, raising “spoiled” children.

    • CTBob says:

      If that’s the case, wouldn’t it be smarter for California to “leapfrog” to the END of the primary calender? I can’t recall a time when anyone paid attention to the Puerto Rico, South Dakota and Montana primaries. If California’s primary were to be held next week, they would indeed be the king- (queen-?) makers.

      • JMorgan says:

        It’s certainly arguable (which is more powerful, California holding its primary early or late), and Californians could certainly game (or try to) a presidential election with the best of them, but I am approaching this from the perspective of the voter, of all voters in all states, of having a full plank of candidates still in the race by the time we get to weigh in.

        California voted relatively early (March 5th), and yet top-tiered candidates had dropped out of the race by then. Early states have a very powerful effect on fundraising and influences later elections. As well, consider those voters who cast absentee ballots weeks earlier for a candidate who dropped out just days before the primary.

        We seem to be in a weird kind of state of suspended animation, where we are moving toward doing away with the electoral college (without really debating it), of having one nationwide primary day. If that’s true, so be it, but we need to do it intensively (again, IMHO), debate it thoroughly, and then implement it swiftly so that we don’t have more primary seasons like this one. This season it was MI and FL, and a penalty of a 50% loss of delegates. Next season, I guarantee you it’s going to be CA and TX, and a 25% loss of delegates, or even less. Then it’s going to be one gigantic pile-on of states, all jockeying to be first, knowing that there really is no penalty.

    • SouthernDragon says:

      This is a comment I made last night.

      I’m wondering if anyone on the RBC is going to stand up and say, “Hey look, both of these candidates agreed to the rules in 2007. Regardless of how the Dems in either legislature voted the Dems in those legislatures knew the rules at the time they voted. Do the rules mean anything or do we change them midstream because the states believe they can ignore the rules at their convenience.”

      If the RBC, and by extension the DNC, doesn’t enforce the rules as previously agreed to by all candidates, not only Obama and Clinton, what effect will that have on future campaigns?

      I like knowing what the rules of the game are and if I have agreed to them I have a responsibility to abide by them

      That’s where I am on the issue. One can hope that the whole process is re-evaluated. First order of business after we take power away from the warmongers and greedheads. And I would imagine there is much discussion currently going on within the DNC. Back burner now to be sure but it’s there.

  54. yonodeler says:

    How can anyone presume to assign delegates based on “scientific” analysis of how voters would have voted if they had voted with no penalty hanging over their state?

  55. Audrey says:

    FWIW: I’ve long had the feeling that Hillary was asked to continue running. As long as she and Obama are slugging it out, people are being glavanised to register as Democrats and go out and vote. Millions more than would have otherwise if Obama were simply running agaisnt McCain. Obama may have his faults, but his expertise at organizing and GOTV points to him as the one most likely to encourage her. Just IMO. I believe I did hear him say something like “if she wants to run, she should”.

    Not to ignore the fact that they’ve campaigned in every state for once. I’m so tired of being ignored by Dems because Texas was a write-off to Reps. Feels good to see them doing this.

    • JMorgan says:

      And yours is not an opinion that’s lonely. There has been some rumored whispers that Obama has all of the superdelegates he needs, that he’s controlling the process and dribbling them out a couple a day. I’m not one of those who believe this, but there are many who do and I concede it’s possible.

      The reason I don’t believe it is because I think it’s harmful in three ways:

      1) It’s irritating the hell out of me, and if I’m irritated enough to consider abandoning the Democratic Party forever, people with less patience and less connection to Democratic politics (that would be a goodly number of Obama supporters) are already gone.

      2) I think it’s dumb, counter-intuitive politics in that it inhibits a unified coalescing of the different groups within the party and a coordinated campaign against Republicans not only at the national level but in state contests.

      3) Financially (and is that really what it’s all about?) it’s a nightmare. The DNC is broke because of this. $26 million dollars a month ago was all it had on hand, and as long as this campaign continues, contributors are spending their money financing a war between two of its own (Clinton and Obama) instead of spending it against Republicans.

      4) It’s extremely risky for Obama to leave this unsettled for the summer. Not that Clinton’s wildest dreams might be realized (another Rev. Wright in Obama’s closet, or some scandal), but because he’s seen her dirty tactics, he’s been blindsided by them, and he’s no fool. But while he’s no fool……

      5) I don’t think Obama is that disciplined a politician.

      6) Obama and his people claim that he doesn’t have them (superdelegates, enough yet to put him over the top), and I take him at his word.

      • Audrey says:

        I’m sorry it irritates you. The fractiousness on the threads is pretty nauseating, but look at the benefits for the Dems having a prolonged primary season for a minute:

        Because the campaign is going to every state (except FL & MI) Democrats and others who don’t like the way the nation is going are feeling empowered…maybe for the first time ever. And they’re signing up in droves to vote in the primaries. If they vote in the primaries, they’ll most likely vote in the general. This campaign is changing the party demographic as well as enlivening it. Obama has a ground crew in place to assist this. I think that’s wonderful. Would he have had to work harder as the sole candidate? I think so. Because it would have caused primaries to be run on local issues in many states…not quite as galvanizing.

        McCain has been marginalized in the press due to the “bloody” battle between Clinton and Obama. He rarely makes the news unless it’s a scandal and I think that’s awesome too. When it’s not a scandal, he sounds just like Bush.

        The “all guns blazing” Republican smear machine has had to hold fire until the race is decided. Yes, some shots have been fired, but not enough to matter at this point–except to 28%ers. The longer Obama has to build his campaign, the better off he’ll be.

        I think the pluses far outweigh the minuses on this issue.

        • JMorgan says:

          Audrey, again, just my opinion: This is not the kind of prolonged primary season that the Dems want, or needed after 8 years of Bush-Cheney. It was the “feel good” of Obama that brought new voters, and not the fractiousness, which there is ample evidence sends voters home. It turns them off, and it turns off the “good” voters (Obama types, such as the independents and undecideds) versus the voters inclined to vote for Clinton who are the Dem party’s reliables.

          In addition, you can’t predict who will turn up for the GE by who voted in the primary, and in this election cycle, there are just too many variables to predict anything.

          As far as McCain goes, I think your assessment of his marginalization is extremely generous. The polls certainly don’t reflect it. His numbers should be on the negative side, given Bush’s numbers and given that it’s, well, McCain. Instead, he’s got a real chance of winning, which is just the cherry on top of the nuts on top of the whipped cream over the ice cream and hot fudge of this CrAzY election sundae.

          I am entertaining my own nightmares as to what may happen by the time Republicans hold their convention, and one of them is that their candidate ultimately is NOT going to be McCain, for whatever reason (sickness, death, etc.) and that we won’t be the only one holding a brokered convention.

    • emptywheel says:

      Fair reflection is the requirement that the delegation reflects the will of those who participate in the presidential selection process. It’s part of the DNC rules.

      The correct answer to that question–for the Obama people and for the MI primary in general (I agree FL is somewhat different)–is that those who participated in the primary did not believe it was part of the presidential selection procses.

  56. rwcole says:

    This battle to be “first” is pathetic. It really only matters to the local teevee stations. Those that are first collect millions in campaign ads. Those at the tail end usually get zip. Stupid.

  57. hazmaq says:

    JPMORGAN

    – your friend Ickies got his ass kicked by Wexlers answer, when only 750,000 Democrats voted for Kerry in 2004.

    Florida had the lowest percentage of new Democratic voters compared to every other state in the Nation.

    • JMorgan says:

      MY friend Ickes?

      Where did you get the mistaken notion that I’m a supporter of Clinton’s?

  58. Sara says:

    Southern Dragon, that is the normal process. A new DNC will be seated in January, 2009, after a new President has appointed a new DNC chair, and they will establish a commission to review all the rules, how they worked in 2008, and recommend changes and a process for establishing a new calendar for 2012.

    There are a couple of master recommendations out there for calendar changes, one by the Conference of Secretaries of State which is quite interesting, but will require legislation, and the Commission and the DNC will have to decide whether to support it.

    In general most Progressives want to see rules which encourage a first round of primaries that are “retail” where candidates have to go cafe to cafe and answer questions from actual voters, and not just from the press. This is most easily done in smaller states where candidates are less dependent on TV. People may not be impressed with the lack of diversity in Iowa and New Hampshire, but they appreciate the voter-candidate contact in those states. It is also the one way a candidate without multi-bucks in the bank can show potential strength and quickly raise funds for a full campaign, as Hart did in 1984, and as Obama did this year. Realizing these values is totally dependent on your rules and calendar.

    • SouthernDragon says:

      Thanks for the info. I not junkie enough to know the inner workings of the party. I’m an independent, anyhow.

      I’m the treasurer for a candidate trying to unseat Bill Young and Samm Simpson has been doing the cafe-to-cafe bit all along. We don’t have a lot of money so Samm spends a lot of her time pressing the flesh with the neighborhood groups, etc. We got a really late start in 06 but ended up with more votes than any other Dem who ever ran against Young.

      Never give up.

    • AngryB says:

      sorry messed up – my point was going to be that the SCOTUS made an exception and selected the POTUS so why can’t the rules committee make an exception!

  59. JMorgan says:

    I’m watching this on CSpan, and right now, if there is a God in the heavens, I’d love to see that chyron under Carl Levin that says “uncommitted superdelegate” to turn over before our eyes, to “Senator Clinton superdelegate.”

    What a tool!

  60. Audrey says:

    JMorgan, I don’t have a dog in this hunt. I’m neither pro-Obama or pro-Clinton. I’m looking at the big picture and I’m seeing lots of positives. You can highlight the negatives, but for me, I’ve seen a lot of that and not much of the other, or I wouldn’t have brought it up. We can talk about cup half full or half empty all day. Personally, IMO, the risk of losing to McCain would be stronger if Hillary had pulled out after Super Tuesday. As far as media coverage and marginalizing McCain, I’m only going by what I’ve seen so far and it’s been as I painted it. I’m not being generous at all. Just practical from a newsaholic’s perspective.

Comments are closed.