More from the RBC Meeting

Bill Nelson spoke on behalf of FL, supporting the Ausman challenge.

He did one thing that–as a voter from the Clusterfuck state–I found very important. He told the stories of the activists who have been working hard this election, registering new people and expanding their local parties. He described two women who have been elected delegates and who, if FL’s delegation will be seated, will represent the state in Denver.

And that, IMO, is what has been missing from this debate on all sides. Those women in FL–and a lot of the people here in MI, particularly the Obama supporters who got elected in District Caucuses–are what this process is about. Making sure those activists who will get a Democrat elected this fall go to join their colleagues from across the country.

Too often, in these debates, the activists in FL and MI have been forgotten. Thanks to Bill Nelson for remembering that this party lives and dies on the backs of activists like those two women.

Update: AZ Matt asked me whether the MI challenge has been presented yet. No. There’s one more speaker–Robert Wexler, representing the Obama camp–to speak on the FL challenge. Then the speakers on the MI challenge are, in order:

  • Mark Brewer (the challenger)
  • Carl Levin (representing the state)
  • David Bonior (representing the Obama campaign)
  • Jim Blanchard (representing the Clinton campaign)

Update: Here’s a diary from one of the two activists Nelson mentioned.

Senator Nelson just used my name to argue a position that I do not support.  Anyone who knows me or has read my diaries, knows that as a Florida grassroots organizer, I understood that Florida broke the rules. I played by the rules. I organized Tampa Bay area Obama supporters to help elect Senator Obama as our next president by fundraising, online networking and rapid response as well as phonebanking to and canvassing in other states. In fact the week before the January 29th primary, I was otherwise occupied getting out the vote in South Carolina.  I also traveled to North Carolina and phonebanked to Texas, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, etc.

I ran for pledged Obama delegate in Florida CD 9 to make sure that IF Florida’s delegation is seated, Senator Obama would be represented by a loyal supporter in my district.

198 replies
  1. Rayne says:

    Yes, Nelson was effective with that point.

    Joyner, however is not effective. I don’t know how much of this is her presentation style, or that she is not making a case that hasn’t already been made.

  2. JPL9 says:

    Didn’t Florida have an amendment effecting property taxes at the time of the primary? That alone would increase voter turnout IMO.

  3. LindaR says:

    EPU’d –

    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.

  4. Rayne says:

    Damn, I missed that, had a phone call come in just as Brazile started speaking. HuffPo’s Sam Stein posted that there was a backroom agreement last night on FL’s delegation.

  5. siri says:

    OK JMorgan and Southern Dragon, I get all of that.
    But how can they NOT do SOMETHING when Obama wasn’t even on the ballot in MI??? Cause he followed the rules???
    this is such a mess.
    what about that???

    • 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.

      • siri says:

        i heard Dean’s opening speech and it was another great one from him!
        But Obama wasn’t even on the MI ballot!
        That can NOT be fair.

    • Adie says:

      I don’t mind arguing. Dang. You hit the nail on the head.

      It. Is. A. Mess. Obama !BETTER NOT! be cut out because he followed the rules.

      *note to self: buy more powerful dehumidifier for computer room*

  6. barbara says:

    Wexler opened with olive branch. Now he’s getting to the heart of the Obama and Clinton pledge to not campaign in FL. Obama’s decision to honor the rules affected the outcome, says Wexler.

    • siri says:

      right, right,
      EXACTLY MY POINT from above.
      Obama’s about to get “punished” for following the rules!

  7. Petrocelli says:

    Wexler is making an impression on me like the one Sen. Whitehouse made with his Chart.

  8. barbara says:

    Speaks of the canard that Obama was the cause of FL mess. Refutes this. Approved window for do-over disregarded. Primary re-do rejected. Entire U.S. delegation from FL issued statement calling Florida Dem party not to hold a second primary.

  9. barbara says:

    Wexler says Obama in no way responsible for decision of FL leaders. Must find way as Dems for FL to participate in historic nominating process. His passion is rising. Cites Republican rules imposition on FL.

  10. barbara says:

    Asks committee to restore FL in accordance with Ausman (sp>) petition. (Some applause) Obama should be commended for offering this extraordinary concession.

  11. barbara says:

    Obama offers this concession to provide reconciliation. Nelson, Joyner applauded Ausman Petition. If FL can get it together and keep eye on ball, we can prevail in November (my words, not his).

    Please reinstate unpledged FL superdelegates @ 1/2 vote each.

  12. barbara says:

    Time for campaigns and rules committee to reach dignified resolution. Obama campaign there to participate in unifying process.

  13. Petrocelli says:

    Here’s what crossed my mind … Rove & Co. appearing before this Wexler … I would pay to see that …

  14. juslin says:

    ahhhh – interesting …. clinton will accept the ruling of the dnc… and work to unify the party – ala andrea mitchell

  15. barbara says:

    Q (Alice Germond): what happened when “event” occurred in January? Congrats to those who came out to vote. Property tax issues brought a lot of people to the polls? (Dunno where she’s going with this.) How to redress, respect those who were told pres vote would not count?

  16. joejoejoe says:

    Wexler kicked ass.

    Alice Germond is kickass too. Germond: “When you held your ‘event’”… – she won’t even call it an election!

  17. nomolos says:

    I do notice that there are a number of women and persons of colour on the committee. Whacha think would the GOP committee have the same make up?

    • Rayne says:

      DNC and state party charters and bylaws typically specify that there will be equal representation among its officers — which I believe extends to the DNC committee members as well.

      The problem I’ve had with the Michigan bylaws is that they specify for chair and co-chair one white and one person of the opposite race — pretty sure that’s the way it reads — and that doesn’t recognize the increasing number of mixed race persons like me.

  18. barbara says:

    Wexler acknowledges large FL turnout. Notes that had Obama and Clinton campaigned there (I thought she did), turnout would have been larger. Only state where Rep turnout was greater than Dems.

    Resolve by doing what Obama campaign petitions for, i.e., compromise. Must reconcile with FL voters via Ausman Petition to put delegates at convention per petition and move forward unified.

    • dakine01 says:

      FWIW, neither Obama nor Clinton campaigned in FL or MI. Obama I believe voluntarily removed his name from the MI ballot but was not under any obligation to do so.

      I also recall hearing that both Obama and Clinton did have private fund raisers in FL prior to the “primary.”

      • Petrocelli says:

        Are you implying that, had all the candidates been allowed to campaign in Florida, the results would have been the same as it is now ?

        • dakine01 says:

          No, as I have no idea what the result would have been because of the other factors at play (such as the tax measure).

          I stated simply what I know, i.e., it was a fairly level playing field in FL with both names on the ballot and neither campaigning there.

          • Petrocelli says:

            I am surprised at this view, which Hillary also shares and according to me, is disingenuous (no disrespect to you Sir)

            • dakine01 says:

              Why is it disingeneous? Don’t forget, Obama actually did have some advertising in FL that Clinton did not have due to a national ad buy.

              Hold them to the same standard across the board.

              • Petrocelli says:

                Brand Recognition … my disingenuous remark was directed at HRC’s view point, not to you …

                • dakine01 says:

                  and that brand recognition was offset by the advertising that Obama ran that HRC did not.

                  It may not be perfectly level but there is no such thing in politics or anything else with human involvement.

                  • Petrocelli says:

                    Really ? 8 years as First Lady and more as Senator = Obama’s ads ?

                    Sounds like Rove’s Math …

                    • dakine01 says:

                      Please. By the time of the vote, Obama had been dominating the news due to his victory in Iowa and the attendant coverage. He was not some totally unknown neophyte that no one had ever heard of before.

                      And in many respects, those 8 years as first lady did HRC no favors in this.

                      So lets agree that we don’t agree on this as neither of us is changing our minds.

  19. barbara says:

    Wexler asked again about fully restoring the delegation. Says he’s answered that question, which generated some groany moans from audience.

  20. nomolos says:

    Harold Despickes. A dreadful man. No reason for being other than to whore himself to one candidate or another.

  21. TheOtherWA says:

    Thank you for live blogging this. Out here on the west coast I just got up, on my first cup of coffee and turned on the teebee in time to hear Wexler speak.

  22. siri says:

    Let Us Unify!!!!!!

    and “hil” is such a great FIGHTER.

    do we get the gist of the difference here?

  23. barbara says:

    Wexler: Re: up to number of 19 delegates per Ausman/Osman/Ostman/ says it is a concession which, in his view, unifies.

    What is concept of fair reflection (Wexler asks Ickes, who brought it up).

    Ickes chooses not to respond.

  24. Twain says:

    Maybe I am just mean spirited but it irritates me that any concessions have to be made to Clinton. Her behavior does not warrant it.

    • siri says:

      not to mention that it’s just basically unethical.

      is this the “different treatment cause she’s a woman” thing?????

  25. Adie says:

    s’cuse pups. gotta go change outta jammies & start the wash.

    i know. i know. i lied, o.k.?

  26. barbara says:

    Wexler says Obama campaign did not have op it would have had to review slate of FL delegates. FL delegates should be reinstated today, but Obama campaign should be able to review the slate per rules.

    Do not penalize for complying with the rules.

  27. barbara says:

    Wexler charges rules committee with (my words) failure to sort this out by penalizing FL 100% in the day. Says they’re being treated the way Republicans would treat delegations.

    • dakine01 says:

      Republicans actually penalized FL, MI, NH, and SC half of their delegations for breaking their primary rules.

  28. barbara says:

    Huffman pitbulls having her question answered. (Not necessarily a bad thing) Says she’s trying to understand, based on the fact that she could not foresee what might be coming down the pike and therefore her vote a year ago reflected that (my words) failure of foresight.

  29. Adie says:

    if anyone thinks this is messy, try to imagine the pugs doing something comparable in public without eventually needing maCe & gladiator helmets.

  30. barbara says:

    Wexler says Ausman petition based on votes that were cast. Division of delegates based on percentage that each candidate got.

  31. barbara says:

    Wexler is only person who fought for votes of Floridian to be counted. Cut off at knees (my words) by Jeb Bush. Verified paper trail advocate. Probably why Obama chose him to be at DNC today. Believes Floridians should have voices heard.

    Out of time.

  32. barbara says:

    Allan Katz sends kudos to Wexler.

    Appreciation from chair.

    Petitioners, speakers acknowledged.

    Will take this into serious deliberation this afternoon and vote.

    Time to move to the MI issue, in spite of being over scheduled time. Want to do that before lunch. (Sound of grumbly tummies)

  33. joejoejoe says:

    Florida gets 4 hours. Michigan gets 40 minutes. Then it’s chicken sandwiches for everyone!

  34. siri says:

    MAN! I’d have PAID big money to be there just to see Wexler!
    He’s just so awesome!
    He TOTALLY rocked, didn’t he???

  35. eyesonthestreet says:

    Did Ickes leave after he failed at his question, and why was he wearing a clown suit?

  36. siri says:

    driving mr. siri nutz, putting up the volume so i can hear it from the “dressing room” cause i gotta get out of my jammies.
    poooor thing!

  37. barbara says:

    Review of MI “event” history beginning in 2007. Moved from Feb 2008 to Jan 2008 the binding event. Rules imposed 100% loss of delegates on the heels of that decision. Contemplated holding another contest. A re-do that would comply with rules. State party decided it was logistically impossible to do so.

  38. Adie says:

    oh STOP IT gang!!!

    The Mr. is right next to me, doing the ironing (YES I married a guy whose mom taught him how to iron – jealous yet?).

    He loves the idea of the Lake, tho he only visits thru me. How do I explain my latest whoots & giggles with all you imaginary buffoons.

    I jus’ LUV u pups. I may remain sane after all…. There’s hope still…
    *yuk yuk/sniffle/giggle/sigh/smile*

    • Adie says:

      Hey, give the gal a break. I mean, she’s the only one dressed, in public.

      *yoo hoo!? when you’re ready dear. no great rush*

      rush to flush. u mean it WASN’T pure & simple judgement after all?

      sounds like a stress position to me… but then i’m the suspicious sort.

  39. Adie says:

    O.K. Did I ever get cruel enuf to mention how much fun it is to be retired, and not having anyone tut-tutting as i sit here in jammies at 12:36 in the p.m. EDT?????

    Oh the humanity! But heck, some senators clear the precious “bling” off their office walls in their jammies, or so i’ve been told. plaid, yet. *g*

    • juslin says:

      ohhh – no wwonder!! fellow retiree here and loving every bit of it!! eat drink sleep when i feel like it!! lolol

      • Petrocelli says:

        Hey juslin … summer is finally coming to Toronto, albeit at a snail’s pace …

      • siri says:

        i was retired once.
        i loved it.

        then i took on Mr. siri, and it’s lookin like we’ll be getting his 11 year old in our home here this summer, so
        it’s back to the trenches of motherhood.

  40. barbara says:

    Believes DNC has authority to reinstate whole delegation.

    Allocation of delegates based on primary not a fair reflection of MI voter preferences AT THAT TIME (emphasis mine). As to 55 uncommitted delegates, Obama and Edwards supporters organized to educate their supporters to vote uncommitted in the primary. Ergo, 40% voted uncommitted (unprecedented). Entirely due to Obama/Edwards efforts.

    Cannot be said 55 uncommitted delegates are not truly uncommitted; are a surrogate/proxy, and should be allocated to Obama.

  41. barbara says:

    Mark Brewer speaking. Addresses write-in votes. Write-in votes not counted unless candidate notifies they want their votes counted. Post-primary, write-in votes–nearly 30,000 uncounted state-wide, likely for Obama and not counted.

  42. barbara says:

    Proposes adjusting delegate allocation, correct to reflect true state of things in MI based on all data, primary and all available data. Far fairer reflection of preference of MI voters.

    Basis of 69-59 allocation.

  43. barbara says:

    Brewer state chair.

    Tina Flournoy re 69-59 allocation; what is basis? Brewer repeats what he said. Exit votes and subsequent data. She questions validity of exit polls.

  44. barbara says:

    David McDonald question. Asks for review of counted votes.

    Suggesting people who voted for Clinton did because they had that option. Uncommitted et al likely not for her.

  45. FrankProbst says:


    Check out the post up at AmericaBlog right now–says that Bill Nelson totally misrepresented one of the activists he talked about. Interesting stuff.

    Also, HuffPo is saying that there already been a backroom deal made to seat the entire Florida delegation with 1/2 vote for each, which sounds like what Brazile already let out of the bag

  46. Twain says:

    Mark Twain was right – we do not belong to an organized party. I truly hate this stuff.

  47. barbara says:

    Elaine Kamarck suggests uncommitted votes meant just that, and were not necessarily Obama’s. Cedes most might eventually emerge as Obama votes. Thinks assignment of delegates is arbitrary. (Urgh) Suggests this is precedence for future chaos, i.e., cherry-picking (my words) data to make case. Goes back to 1968 election. Believes this is a precedent for the future. (I respectfully suggest, says barbara, that precedent for the future has already been set by ignoring agreed-upon rules, but that’s just me.)

  48. joejoejoe says:

    I wish this guy speaking for Michigan was the commissioner of the NBA. The Pistons would still be alive! I’m totally in the tank for Obama but I can’t make heads or tails out of the MI proposal.

    • Adie says:

      i mean, who-do-ya-think caused that little tic sentaur voinovichy of ohiuh seems to have developed in the past few years? huh? huh?

  49. siri says:

    From AMERICAblog:

    Senator Nelson just used my name to argue a position that I do not support. Anyone who knows me or has read my diaries, knows that as a Florida grassroots organizer, I understood that Florida broke the rules. I played by the rules. I organized Tampa Bay area Obama supporters to help elect Senator Obama as our next president by fundraising, online networking and rapid response as well as phonebanking to and canvassing in other states. In fact the week before the January 29th primary, I was otherwise occupied getting out the vote in South Carolina. I also traveled to North Carolina and phonebanked to Texas, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, etc.

    I ran for pledged Obama delegatge in Florida CD 9 to make sure that IF Florida’s delegation is seated, Senator Obama would be represented by a loyal supporter in my district.

    Those who played by the rules are the ones who are actually being punished. That’s disturbing.

    THAT is exactly my point that’s turning me gray here!

  50. barbara says:

    Brewer wishes he had more, better data.

    Ickes rises to bait. Speaks of candidates voluntarily withdrawing names from ballot. Were not required to do that. No mention nor requirement for same, i.e., completely voluntary. Some say they did that to curry favor with Iowa. (ICKes!)

  51. barbara says:

    Tom Heintz (?)

    Brewer says there were some local elections on ballot that would have been on a different election but got moved to the pres primary; no other statewide races on ballot.

  52. FrankProbst says:

    Memo to all of the elected officials who are making any sort of “count every vote equally” right now:

    When all of this is said and done, please fix the damn primary system. And while you’re at it, abolish the electoral college. Nominating our candidate for President based on delegate votes at a national convention has been an obsolete practice since the invention of the telegraph. So has the electoral college. We’ve now had two major clusterfucks within 8 years, so please don’t feed me any bullshit about how the system USUALLY works, so we don’t need to fix it. And don’t tell me you don’t have time, either. If you’ve got time to debate telecom immunity, you’ve got time do deal with this first.

    • joejoejoe says:

      Anybody on the DNC committee who makes the “count every vote equally” argument should be pelted with rotten vegetables. Indiana and North Carolina got a 15% bonus for going late, Texas had a primacaucus, Massachusetts and Washington have almost identical populations but wildly different delegate allocations — ‘one person, one vote’ is an empty slogan.

      Belonging to the Democratic Party is like belonging to a bowling league. If the league secretary screws up the dues it’s the bowlers who are ultimately responsible. We need more engaged Democrats to kick the ass of the crappy state party leaders who are acting like dunces in order to have a better process.

      I’m not blaming anybody here other than myself. I fired off an email to the FL Democratic Party opposing moving the date but obviously that wasn’t nearly enough. I need to do more if I’m going to expect more from volunteers.

      • Adie says:

        u blame yerself again, & i’m gonna swat ya upside yer head.

        All jokes aside, everyone here is involved wayyyyy more than “average” or they wouldn’t be here.

        Thank you for your service. We all can do more. It’s best not to work soooo hard at “it” that we tip over with the screaming meme-ies. Everyone’s needs, availability, capacity, ideas, are their own. The fact that so many come to the Lake and give of themselves for the greater good…

        That, to my way of thinking, is a phenomenally powerful force for positive change.

        air raid’s over. u can come back out from under your desks, class. ;->

  53. barbara says:

    Hynes! Reviews Brewer’s three points:

    Returns (actual), exit polls w/9-point dropoff for Clinton vs. primary results, 30,000 absentee ballots (Brewer said write-ins earlier, not sure which is accurate)

  54. barbara says:

    Suggests fourth point: Voters who did not vote in the primary, which cannot accurately be gauged (seems like simple math, but that’s not my strong suit).

    Suggests Clinton vs. uncommitted may have resulted in some votes swaying to Clinton since she was the only named option.

  55. eyesonthestreet says:

    The “popularity of a candidate”- Clinton so much depended on her name recognition, her “brand” that she did not dare take her “brand” name off of the ballot.

  56. barbara says:

    Working group of four appointed by governor to try to remedy the situation, all present with Levin.

    Flawed party system evident owing to this situation.

    Dem party needs unity. People want that. MI party has achieved unity. Asking DNC to preserve it.

    Recommend ppl before: seat all delegates with full voting rights; believes Obama and Clinton reps will offer support of that; MI Dem party overwhelmingly supports that position

    Disagreement: MI Dem party has compromise ppl on how to allocate; based on Mark Brewer evidence, two other paths.

    Divide 64-64 owing to flawed primary (Obama position)
    Divide 73-55 representing and assuming that other uncommitteds should go to Obama (per Clinton position)

  57. barbara says:

    David needs my attention. Outta here. Thanks for indulging my piracy, if piracy it was/is/whatever. Wake me when it’s over, puh-leeze!

  58. Petrocelli says:

    Levin is arguing the case of the child who got caught with candy … “He did it first” …

  59. eyesonthestreet says:

    73- 69 = 4 Like Larry David, let her have her 4 extra delegates, if that is what she will ask, then she can claim some “moral” victory, IMHO

Comments are closed.