Tag Archive for: Hillary Clinton

We will deal with Florida first, then Michigan. Limited debate.

Alice Huffman is speaking in support of her proposal to seat all of Florida. She got so much mail in support of seating Florida.

David McDonald opposing this motion, because it asks to go back to a time before it was complicated by campaign interests. The standard for FL getting a waiver is more complicated now than it was, given the documents produced (not sure what that means). This is not a problem that the voters in FL caused. It is a problem that impacts both those who went to the polls and those who did not.

Yvonne Gates also opposes. This is about respecting the rules. We’re not trying to penalize those individuals. When you have rules, they must be followed. If they’re not followed, you have chaos. I won’t be able to support the motion.

Hartina Flournoy. It saddens me that this motion has no chance of passing the body. I thought what drove these rules was being a party of inclusion. I’m sad about the fact that we will take a vote that does not bring FL back in. (She confuses MI and FL twice.)

Alice Germond. We told the voters the beauty contest had no meaning. Raises MLK. And Geraldine Ferraro.

Ickes. Want to associate myself with Tina Flournoy and Alice.

Mona Pasquill. Thanks for the gifts of food. There are sometimes when you have to revisit the rules. We talk a lot about respect. I want to be responsible to these voters.

Motion fails by 15-12. Chants of "Denver, Denver" throughout.

Ralph Dawson. Consider reduction of penalty to 50%. In view of offer by Obama’s campaign to afford certain delegates. 1) All pledged delegates be restored, at .5 vote. In addition, all pledged delegate positions shall be allocated Hillary 52.5, Edwards 6.5, Obama 33.5 delegate votes. Unpledged delegates cast one-half vote at the Convention. Fill delegate positions including right of approval.

Alice Huffman. Not the motion I would have liked. I also know that we cannot leave here and not do something, for Florida. When you can leave with unity, what this party needs is unity. We will leave here more united than we came. This is about finding a way to make whole, to some degree.

Lipstick on a pig, someone calls.

Alice Huffman. Do you believe in Democracy? That vote failed. Please conduct yourselves like proper men and women. Read more →

There’s something disturbing in the Rules and By-Law Committee Meeting Materials handed out for Saturday’s meeting: the distinct possibility that the RBC will overturn the results of MI’s April 19 Convention, the only thing approaching a real exercise in democracy this year. It’s the problem of how to assign uncommitted delegates as supporting Obama.

First, the document pretty much throws out the possibility of doing a 69-59 split, which is what the MDP recommended.

If the RBC determines that any of the pledged delegate positions should be restored to the MDP, the first question presented is whether the results of the January 15, 2008 primary should be used in any way in allocating the results.

On the one hand, if the RBC does determine that Michigan should be allowed to send some pledged delegates to the Convention, there must be some basis for allocating those delegates among presidential candidates (preferences). A fundamental principle of delegate selection is expressed in the provision of the Charter requiring that delegates be chosen through processes which “assure that delegations fairly reflect the division of preferences expressed by those who participate in the Presidential nominating process.” Similarly, Rule 13(A) of the Delegate Selection Rules provides that, “Delegates shall be allocated in a fashion that fairly reflects the expressed presidential preference or uncommitted status of the primary voters….” In this case, it can be argued, there is no basis for ensuring “fair reflection” of presidential preference other than to use the results of the January 15 primary.

On the other hand, it can be argued that the primary as a whole could not possibly have served as a “fair reflection” of presidential preference because most of the candidates then running for the nomination were not on the ballot.

It then proceeds by considering a whole bunch of possibilities pertaining to the original Clusterfuck, the January 15 primary, apparently believing the RBC can only address those results. It rules out categorically giving all the uncommitted delegates to Obama.

Nevertheless, there is no specific authority whatsoever in the Delegate Selection Rules or the Call for the RBC to award delegate positions won by the “Uncommitted” preference to a particular candidate or candidates.

Read more →