I'm pretty p.o.'d that political parties are finding more ways to put wedges between what the people want and what the party allows the people to do. The "rules" are getting more and more convoluted and are disenfranchising more and more voters. I talked to a number of elderly people during the Texas primaries who were not able-bodied enough to go BACK to the caucuses and who were very concerned that voting ONCE in the primary wasn't ENOUGH.

I can only imagine the frustration of the people in Florida and Michigan at not having their voices heard. Absolutely, they should be allowed to have primaries and seat delegates.

And after this election is all over, I think there are going to be quite number of us willing to raise some Cain about how the "process" has created barriers that make the election system even more unfair than it already was. REMEMBER - GORE WON THE POPULAR VOTE AND LOST THE ELECTION TO BUSH! The will of the people was overrun by "the rules".

Joan --

I've been reading (here on Salon) from Florida voters. I'm sure some of them have posted here, as well. They say that all Democratic candidates were on the ballot AND that Sen. Obama did campaign there, via televised commercials that aired in two or more markets, including Florida. I recall reading about this elsewhere when this was all happening, but apparently it didn't get any traction in the media. Clinton did not campaign there, but won the primary. Does this shift the focus at all?

The other piece of this is that apparently Gov. Crist and the legislature in Florida determined the primary date and the Democrats had no choice in the matter.

If this is the case, then perhaps Florida's delegates do indeed count and should be seated, since the rules were not broken by Florida's Democratic Party, but set by Republicans in the state.

Can anybody at Salon flesh this out to fill in some blanks and details about this? I think it would make a great and informative piece that would enlighten the debate over what to do about these delegates.

Just a couple of additional thoughts...

The millions of dollars that Bill and Hillary have been pulling in have strings attached. Bill has promised all sorts of things to all sorts of people.

What have they promised?

Who has paid them off?

What will they need to do to repay their benefactors?

We will not know the answer to these questions until Hillary releases her tax forms.

RELEASE YOUR TAX FORMS, HILLARY

RELEASE YOUR TAX FORMS, HILLARY RELEASE YOUR TAX FORMS, HILLARY RELEASE YOUR TAX FORMS, HILLARY

Time to tell the truth, and stop lying.

RELEASE THE TAX FORMS, HILLARY.

Democrats from both Florida and Michigan voted in good faith that their ballots would be counted. Because of an arbitrary ruling of the DNC a huge mess has been created. Let the DNC sort it out. Hillary won in Florida. How would her supporters feel if she lost in a re-vote there? It is my understanding that Obama's name was on the ballot.

The only place a revote might be viable would be Michigan if his name were not on the Ballot. But again, Hillary won there. If you add her wins in the two states to the delegate count the math everyone is talking about looks a lot different.

The bottom line is that the DNC created huge mess that promises to get worse. I can assure you that the two candidates are polarizing the Democratic party, and any solution is going to be very rocky. It's not about such great differences in policy. Its about innuendo, experience, hype and fairness. Part of the fairness centers on the implicit and explicit sexism that has been present in the campaign.

I personally believe that Hillary has had a very hard time with the press and media as well as with many voters because she is a woman. All of the progress that has been made in equal rights has fallen prey to sexism or it only ever existed to a certain degree. Sort of sad to think about.

Obama is a great speaker with inspirational ideas but short on experience. There is no doubt that he has won his fair share of supporters and they worship him. He also has many independents and some rebublican converts.

My sense though is that he has also been the beneficiary of many men and women who are simply freaked at the prospect of a female president. So many have said "we're beyond all of that," but I don't think so. Even female Republican pundits are saying Hillary is being treated poorly in many ways because she is a woman.

So, when we talk about fairness we need to not only think of the specifics of the primary race( delegates, super delegates, Florida, Michigan, vote vs. caucus), but also about the way society has responded to the reality that a woman with brains might actually become president. That's what a lot of people who support HIllary feel is unfair. She has done incredibly well with a deck stacked against her.

Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and women have made tremendous strides in achieving parity and equality. It is a twist of fate that two able minority representatives are fighting it out against each other to be the Democratic nominee. Too bad it can't be sequential. It's a waste of incredible power and potency that is going nowhere except to the benefit of Conservatives.

Maybe Al Gore and John Edwards could figure something out. At least they're neutral--ostensibly...., Certainly not the likes of Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, Jay Rockefeller, John Kerry all ardent feminists, I am sure, who have already flocked to Obama's side.

Then, again, maybe it's true that the best person for the Presidency should always and forever be a man.

Why don't the two run together (running mates). Thier goals are similar and they would blow out the republicans. However, I think Hilary is too hungry for power. She has to be president and no one else. Such selfishness and desperation is not good for the party or the country.