Letters to the Editor
-
Super Bowl
Massachusetts is also upset that the NFL refuses to add an additional quarter to the most recent Super Bowl.
-
Why ?
How can the DNC award delegates after they arranged to strip both states of their delegates? I don't believe there was a full ballot of Democratic nominees in these contests so it makes no sense. The only fair way to seat delegates is to have another vote at this point. Or don't seat the delgates at all.
-
Bad timing
The right time to stand up and announce that this isn't right because it would disenfranchise voters was back when those states moved their primaries up. Had they not done that, those votes would count now.
-
Either no presidential vote or uncommitted
I always thought the penalty against Michigan and Florida was too harsh, but they did jump the line and some penalty is fair. It also seems wrong to seat them as Clinton delegates when it really wasn't an election. Two solutions I haven't heard mentioned elsewhere: seat the delegates, but they must be uncommitted, not pledged to a candidate, which means they can't be picked from Clinton or Obama's delegate pool; alternatively, they can have their full slate's of delegates, but no presidential vote. They can vote on everything else, just not president.
I realize both ideas have problems, but there's no perfect solution.
-
Shocking
Aside from the fact that it is shocking to see that Julian Bond is semi-illiterate, it is even more shocking to imagine that someone from the NAACP, of all organizations, would not recognize the patent unfairness of counting votes cast in an election that involved no campaign, no full set of names on the ballot, and no advance warning to voters that the election might count and they needed to vote.
I will be disgusted with the Democratic "powers" if they do not find a solution that involves allowing voters in Michigan and Florida to actually take part in a campaign and have a choice of candidates on their ballots. I don't care if it's a caucus or another primary -- if the Clinton camp thinks caucuses give Obama an unfair advantage, then hold another primary to be absolutely fair. But play by the rules and allow voters the same opportunities to take part in a "real" election that every other state has had.
-
No fair.
In grade school we played four-square a lot, and at the outset of the game we decided which rules we'd use: no backstops, no hardees, etc. If in the middle of the game someone decided that in fact backstops should be used--that she should be awarded the serve based on having scored using the outlawed backstop--we would have laughed her off the playground.
-
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!
As a Floridian, it would be completely unfair to seat delegates based on an election that we were told would not count because we were stripped of our delegates.
When the vote took place, it was pretty wide open between Obama, Edwards & Clinton. I voted for Edwards, but Obama would be my second choice. Since we don't have instant runoff voting, the only choices are new vote/caucus or no delegates.
And this doesn't even bring into consideration Michigan, where only Clinton was on the ballot.
-
Another option
Florida did have a full slate of candidates, but with no campaigning and people thinking their votes wouldn't count, it wasn't a real race. Michigan had Hilary and "Uncomitted" on the ballot. Plus Michigan was an open primary and the Republican vote did count (for half, I believe). So lots of independants that might have voted for Obama probably went and voted for McCain.
But, another option that's been suggested (assuming this is still a toss-up) is to seat all their delegates with the understanding that they will vote in proportion to the rest of the delegate count. They get represented but cannot change the result.
I think the DNC has to basically stand firm. Everyone knew the rules going in (candidates and states) and to change it now would just encourage other states to disobey the rules in four or eight years. These states decided to go ahead because they though their early vote, even if it didn't "count" would be a beauty contest kind of like Iowa and NH (with their small delegrate counts) so they would still have some influence. They guessed wrong.
-
Hillary didn't really win in Michigan.
I have a lot of Obama supporter friends here in Michigan, but not ONE of them showed up to vote "uncommitted". Some stayed home, some voted for McCain, but no one wanted to drive through the rain and wait in line just to cast a meaningless vote against someone, for no one. It is outrageous that Hillary claims a win in Michigan when she couldn't even get 60% of the vote as the only candidate on the ballot (other than Dennis K, of course). Given a new election with all candidates to choose among, Obama could win Michigan easily.
-
Either hold another primary or a caucus
So what if Clinton won Michigan's primary?
Edwards and Obama were not on the ballot, and write-in votes were not allowed. The whole thing was a farce, a banana republic kind of election. I voted Uncommitted because I wanted to express my opposition to Clinton.
She should be careful what she wishes for: If she gets the 80-odd Michigan delegates she won, that also means the 55 Uncommitted will count, too, and I doubt they'll go for Clinton. Add them to all the delegates Obama will likely rack up in the next contests.
-
Flouting the rules
The bottom line is that Florida and Michigan deliberately chose to flout the rules after the consequences of such action had been made clear. So now we're just supposed to say "That's OK, little children. You broke the rules, but we'll let you play anyway"?
Whatever is done it must not be done on the basis of which candidate would reap the political benefit. Rather, the issue must be dealt with on the basis of affirming the necessity of following the established rules. THAT'S fundamental fairness.
-
It is Illogical
...to claim that voters in Michigan had a "free and unfettered vote" when two of the top three candidates were removed from the ballot. That may be how the mayor of Potemkin Village gets elected, but not the President.