1. Placate the powers that be in FL and MI to secure their enthusiastic cooperation in the general election; and

2. Have no effect upon the result of the nomination battle between Clinton and Obama.

Anyway, this is how I saw the goals of the committee, by which I mean the committee as a whole — many individual committee members sincerely care about voters and principles, and I don’t mean to impugn any individual’s integrity in this mess. I believe they did what they sincerely thought was best for the party. But is it any wonder that the interests and expressed preferences of the actual voters got lost in all of this?

You are absolutely right about the awarding of delegates in MI to Obama. I understand the practical reason why they did it, but I am still scratching my head trying to understand the underlying logic.

Lawyers have a saying when they make an equitable argument to a Judge, and seek to provide a legal reason, even a weak one, that the Court can use to legally justify the ruling. They call it “A peg to hang his (or her) hat on.”

Hats are covering the floor at the DNC these days.

“I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee.

“I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan. I know not all of my delegates will do so and I fully respect that decision. But I hope to be President of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention.

“I hope my fellow potential nominees will join me in this.

And proof that it didn’t just suddenly show up on the website is here.

I see that Hillary Clinton did not honor her agreement with the Democratic party concerning the rules of this race.

Now explain to me how busing in protestors has anything to do with that. As for pushig for the challenges – the FL Democratic Party and the superdelegate Ausman filed their challenges long before the FL vote! Try doing a little homework first.

As for your claim of private fundraisers, let me clue you in: fundraising ain’t campaigning. And based on what I’ve been able to find on the internet, those two fundraisers took place in September 2007, long before the January primary.

And I notice you conveniently forgot to mention that Obama ran TV ads there.

Mosquito (a “she” by the way) is wrong. And while it may seem plausible to you, that doesn’t make it any less incorrect. If you had watched the entire presentation of the challenges, as I did, you would see just what I’m talking about.

spotter – Ickes was over the top. I agree. I wouldn’t have said things the way he said them. As for the tie – well, I’m often accused of being a bit too casual myself, so that didn’t bother me.

Clinton also held “private fundraisers” in Florida during the week before Florida’s unrecognized primary, despite agreeing not to campaign there.

Mosquito says it correctly, and his conjecture is a conjecture, but it seems very plausible to me.

Michigan and Florida (poor Florida) are too important to be left out of this process, especially since the delegate count is so close. I agree that it was not right to punish the voters, who voted in the only primaries available to them. However, I found that argument a bit hypocritical coming from the very Michigan leaders who let those voters down.

Did you watch any of the the proceedings? By all accounts, no one expected the turnout that came in these two states. Voters came out to vote despite the fact that the states had been sanctioned.

Hillary’s and her representatives agreed that FLA and MI primaries would not count in electing a President…

When Hillary was desperate she wanted the rules changed (this would be called being a bad sport if it occurred on the playgrounds where I grew up). Suddenly Hillary was going to fight for the voters she herself agreed should not be participating in this primary.

I don’t think she would have given the MI and FLA voters a second thought if things had gone according to Hillary’s plan and she had won the primary on super tuesday….

That’s the way it went according to everything I have seen.

buzz…buzz…

GEM – no one is not answering that question so I don’t know where you are getting that from. No one said give HRC all the votes, either. Obama took his name off – not because he was required to, but because he chose to.

Tone is right – MI did this themselves.

anon – good point on the endorsements of Obama by Richardson & Edwards.

Michigan is a different story entirely. I am mad any super delegates from Michigan got added at all and anything less than 50/50 split is deliberately robbing Obama to appease Clinton, an appeasement I believe the DNC/RBC will regret in coming months… though I hope I am wrong.

I remain mad that Clinton did not honor the agreement she signed when they agreed they’d not campaign in the transgressing states.

I would have rather they stayed at zero or counted it as is but divided it by 4. i.e. twice the penalty of FL.

the HIstory of MI trying to go early is an affront to their voters. Look how often they get no say or opportunity to vote for the eventual nominee.

1980 went early (both carter and kennedy took their name off the ballot and Gerry Brown won his only state)

1988 went early (dukakis and i forget removed their names from the ballot and Lyndon Larouche won it. Well actually uncommitted won he was first among humans)

2000 ditto. Gore and Bradley took their names off.
forget who won. Gore won a revote which was a caucus.

2004 threatened with delegate stripping and backed down

2008 delegates stripped. Obama edwards and others took name off. Clinton wins with uncommitted largely Obama followed by Edwards. Low turnout compared to everywhere else. Write in Obama not even counted at all.

MI is a recidivist offender becasue they are determined to kill the NH IA “strangle”. Levin admits it.They have routinely sacrificed their voters pursuing this crusade. As far as I’m concerned tell the truth about them and have an election with 49 states I could care less if the state doesn;t want a real say……A G A I N

Personally I don’t care about this now and we all need to realize Obama has won and is also the best choice. Time to move on to uniting the party and we will of course need Hillary’s help.

The best thing, though? It’s over. People can stop wasting their time worrying about an issue that doesn’t matter and would never have mathematically altered the outcome of this primary. Thank friggin’ goodness.