Republican voters spoofing our democratic election. The large turnaround in TX is due to Republican rat-fucking our primary election. That's the whole reason she did well yesterday, so I see no reason to cut her any slack.

If it comes to it, FL and MI should probably vote again. Obviously the MI delegation in particular can't be seated as the vote went down.

Thing is, it probably won't come to that. I'm not why so many ostensibly intelligent people find the math so daunting to understand, but the race is now over. Clinton needed a knockout punch in Ohio and Texas to stay viable, and she didn't get it. She at most picked up 10-15 pledged delegates (depending on the final results of the TX caucus.) She's down 150. There's no way for her to catch up, even if FL and MI revote.

Let me break it down in a football metaphor, since people seem to have so much trouble with the math.

Obama is up 34-7 in the fourth quarter. Clinton just scored a touchdown. It is now 34-14. But there are two minutes left and Obama has the ball. He can just take a knee and end this thing (although he might as well run up the score.)

It's over. Kaput. Finished. In the fridge. The Clinton campaign knows this. And so do the superdelegates. I'd expect them to end this contest en masse sometime between now and Pennsylvania. And particularly if Clinton adopts any more McCain talking points between now and then.

Interesting that there's little media coverage of what the people in Florida and Michigan want. I saw one story, but shouldn't their opinion be a frequent news story?

Also, of course their votes should be counted somehow. Who made this decision anyway? Republican law-makers in Florida? DNC officials? Weird. Presidential elections are already undemocratic enough: as in you have to have lots of money to even be a brief contender. let's give people a chance.

Can Obamabots explain this?

I concede your point about Senator Obama being on the Flordia ballot. However, given that the agreement made was that there would be not campaigning there because they broke the Party rules and moved their primary ahead, I think my point still stands.

Now we are learning that the Michican Governor is advocating that her state's delegates be seated. Don't even bother with 're-voting', just seat them as they are, basically. I would expect such a thing from the right-wing, not a member of the Democratic Party (you know, like that Governor from Florida).

I agree that it's unfortunate that the DNC has penalized their delegates for the state leadership's actions. But who chose to move the primaries up? I think it's far more unfair to everyone else in the entire process if Florida's and Michign's delegates are seated (or a 're-vote' were to happen). It would basically tell everyone that certain states due to their size and influence are allowed to flaunt the rules everyone agreed to; and get away with it.

Do people honestly think it's fair to those agreed to certain Party conditions (and essentially stuck with them), only to change the rules mid-way through where it's clear that one candidate will benefit more than another?

Again, we can debate all we want about the merits of the system, and try and figure out what can be changed for the better. But not while it's in motion. Senators Clinton and Obama should each do the right thing - continue their campaigns for delegates in the remaining states, and let the Super Delegates work out what they don't during the convention. Both candidates have a realistic chance - what could be more fair?

The biggest problem I think the Democratic Party has (on whole) is that we allow our leadership to waffle on just about everything, and consequently don't stand for anything - let alone our own principals. One could argue that this issue is a very good test for the kinds of principals each candidate will bring to the White House, if elected.

Obama has a very real chance to regain momentum and close this contest. He should immediately challenge Clinton to a re-vote in Florida and Michigan. Obama can argue that he agrees with Hillary that it is important that the people of Florida and Michigan gets their voices heard and votes counted (thereby removing one of her core arguments) - so bring it on and let the people decide. He agrees to a re-vote in those states if Clinton agrees that the people's delegates - not the superdelegates - decides who wins in the end.

Could Clinton say no? Could Obama lose?

Obama had to file paperwork to take his name off, ie, go out of his way. Clinton did nothing. There was only an agreement not to campaign there, not to all pull their names off the ballots. How is that cheating? It was a ploy that backfired on Obama. His campaign thought it would be humiliating for Clinton if she lost to "uncommitted." They overestimated support for them.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1007/6257.html

A poster upthread claimed that the FL voters were "disenfranchised" by their Republican governor. I'd like to know how accurate that is.

Several prior Salon letter threads have discussed FL & MI before [too bad we don't have the tech to link back to prior threads ].

A poster from FL said the majority Republican legislature in FL pushed through the primary. Other legislation considered vital was in the bills, so the dems they felt they couldn't vote against it. He also provided a link to a dem FAQ on the vote to support his assertions. Unfortunately, a linkedto site (www.fladems.com) contains numerous articles from the Florida democratic party from the time period that undermine the portrayal of the florida dem party as innocent bystanders. They were all for thumbing their nose at the DNC and refusing to kow-tow. The convential wisdom at the time was that it would all be over in early February. Check out their articles from Q3 2007.

So the Florida dem establishment played chicken with the DNC and the voters lost. I think the republican party handled this better. They let the vote go forward, but cut the delegate count by 50% in FL & MI.

The democrats could do something similar, re-vote in FL & MI, but seat half the normal delagates. Everybody votes, the rules are kept, the rulebreakers are punished.