It's not just name recognition among the top 2 candidates. What if Richardson had decided that the large Latino population might make FL a good firewall for him, and spent all his time and money there? Or if John Edwards had decided that his best chance to break through with the media was to hold rallies in front of closed down parts factories in MI?

Those things, along with a host of others, could have radically altered the race had it been a fair contest the first time. But rules are rules, and the Clinton campaign must not be allowed to selfishly change those rules for its own benefit, under the flimsy guise of concern for the voters.

No do-overs.

if the dems dont play by the rules they set up then how can we trust them on anything. this is situational ethics at its worst, something the clintons are so good at. to say she won when she was the only one on the ballot is to enter an alice in wonderland world. it is shocking and a joke. her crowing that she won the texas primary and leaving out the caucus vote that finally added up to so little is an exsample of their nasitiness. is this how a woman will win? i hope with the olympics coming there will be some sense of what it takes to win fairly. how does the big girl compete here. it is becoming so pathetic to watch this female treachery in action. i am ashamed for my gender and for my demographic, which apparently she claims, yet in my circle i have not met one that wishes her the presidency.

Yes, Michigan and Florida should vote again. Candidates should both campaign there and both names should be on the ballot. People from Michigan and Florida should have a chance to vote and have their vote counted.

Any other solution would be bad for democracy, the Democratic Party and both candidates, regardless of who wins and who loses. We need a Democratic nominee that wins the delegates (and the popular vote). Anything else would be a farce and the best ammunition Republicans can get against those who claim to "defend democracy".

I appreciate what appears to be your sincere effort to, as Spike Lee would say, "do the right thing." Among others, Harold Ickes, one of the senior members of the Clinton campaign, approved the FL and MI sanction. But Clinton herself should be held to the fire. She was only concerned about the "disenfrichisement" if the franchised voted for someone else? Machiavelli, line 2 please.

Think of all the voters who stayed home because they were told (consistent with law) that their votes wouldn't count. It simply is not fair to change the rules in the middle of the game, whether it's a game of Monopoly with ym sister or a Democratic primary. If Bill Richardson had known FL would count, he might have acted differently. IT IS UNFAIR TO CHANGE THE RULES NOW!

I would like a full accounting in one of these articles of who made these decisions in FL and MI, when, why, and who they support as the Democratic nominee.

Does anyone know where a good link is regarding those specifics?

also, i generally really hate hit and run bloggers... so I wanted to let you know I am headed out of town for the weekend.

Ricky if you do have the information I asked about in the previous post, I really would like to know. Post it and I will look for it when I get back, even if we can't converse any further. I really do have an interest in evaluating facts fairly and clinging to some modicum of objectivity. I am willing to see the problems, mistakes, and general no-good things that Clinton does. Also the very admirable things that Obama does. I am not a fan of his, I am a fan of hers. My ability to be objective is limited but I truly strive to overcome.

Best wishes to everyone out there struggling to make sense and do the right thing.

Happy Weekend,

Rosewings

I am willing to look at facts, but I need to see the information you are referring to, which surrogates? when? and are you sure they were speaking for her?

I think the sanction was just the stupidest idea ever, especially because Florida republicans left the Florida democrats nowhere to go. And I think Dean is an abysmal chairman of the DNC! What a maroon! as Bugs Bunny would say.

I think Clinton assumed if she was the nominee she would ask for the Florida voters to be seated, and that is why she didn't fret much about the issue. Now it is clear that neither of them can be the nominee without superdelegate votes... so the disenfranchisement of these voters is a very pressing issue. It would be a disaster to lose Florida in the general. It looks to me like McCain is courting Florida Gov Crist... Crist is posturing now, showing concern for the disenfranchised Fla voters... and if he is persuasive Dem chance in Florida are sunk... which makes it more critical than ever to show some respect for the loyal democratic voters of Florida.

In response to your postscript which purports to say that Clinton isn't being selfish in opposing a re-do: one acts selfishly when one puts the self above others. Clinton claims to care about the supposedly disenfranchised voters of FL and MI, but why didn't she voice opposition when this plan was approved, by her surrogates no less, several months ago? She doesn't care who is disenfranchised, she only cares about whatever advances her cause. Just like she and her husband didn't care about Hatians, gays in the military, people on welfare, or any of the many others that the Clintons betrayed during their sordid years in office.

oh and why is it not selfish on Clinton's part. It is because she is perfectly willing to seat the delegates as is. No extra $20 million required... but of course it is to her slight advantage as mention above, to have them seated. It wouldn't bring her outright victory.