Dems: Florida and Michigan looming trouble...Lead Story Saturday WSJ (1 Viewer)

[Pure Energy]

This story was discussed on CSPAN this morning. Seems because the race is so tight this may become a much bigger issue than anyone ever imagined. This article provides 3 scenarios:

1. Status Quo - Don't count the 1.8 million votes from FL or the 600,000 votes from Michigan
2. Count the votes from both states and distribute to each candidate. Since Obama pulled his name from MI, it's not clear how that vote would be distributed but an idea floated in the comments about the story section would be that Obama gets 40% (the uncommitted vote and Hillary would get her 55%.
3. Attempt a do-over. Redo the primary in those states.

If I were a Democrat I would expect some heads to roll in the DNC leadership (at either the National or State levels or both). A worst case scenario is if the delegate count remains close. DNC leadership has to be hoping for one of these candidates to pull away from the other by a large margin to assuage their screwup.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120251551654655203.html

 

[JimEverett]

The DNC did not screw up. Everyone assumes they did - but the national party has to maintain some sort of control over the primary schedule. If not - you would get what is essentially a national primary sometime in Novemeber, a year before the election because every state would try to be the first, or at least try to be early enough to mean something.

 

[MSUSousaphone]

Yeah, maybe everyone doesn't think that the rules are fair but the states were the ones that ignored them. I put the blame on whomever decided to put the primaries where they ended up being.

 

[dapperdan]

The Democratic Convention might be the most entertaining convention of my lifetime. This Democratic primary is turning into a real knock-down, drag-out, cage match.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

But didn't the Republican-controlled Florida legislature decide the date of the Florida primary?

Something will have to be done with Florida and Michigan, but awarding delegates on the basis of the primary voting that took place is not the answer. Obama's supporters can accept Hillary winning the nomination. But they would not be able to accept Hillary winning the nomination because the party changed the rules after the fact with Florida and Michigan.

 

[Waymer]

But didn't the Republican-controlled Florida legislature decide the date of the Florida primary?

In part. That was the initial stage of the cycle...but the state democrats could have kept it back with a little simple maneuvering. They were pretty bold and did not expect sanctions, even after the 30 day warning was enacted and the state was told what would happen.

 

[SaintsFan11]

There is absolutely no way, in my estimation, that the Michigan delegates can be seated at the convention. Obama didn't even put his name on the ballot because he thought it wouldn't matter. It would be incredibly unfair to penalize him for following the rules. Florida isn't quite as bad as Michigan, but once again he would be penalized for following the rules. Either they won't count or they will have to redo the whole thing.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

The rumor mill is that DNC insiders have proposed holding Michigan and Florida caucuses to seat their delegates and the DNC brass are strongly considering.

Source: Morning Joe earlier this week.

 

[crosswatt]

The DNC did not screw up. Everyone assumes they did - but the national party has to maintain some sort of control over the primary schedule. If not - you would get what is essentially a national primary sometime in Novemeber, a year before the election because every state would try to be the first, or at least try to be early enough to mean something.

I think the majority of voters would be better served to have all primaries and caucuses on Super Tuesday and Little Super Tuesday. I don't get to vote on the candidate that I would've because he has withdrawn, due to poor performance in the early primaries.

 

[gavinj]

If I were a Democrat I would expect some heads to roll in the DNC leadership

rofl.

 

[Pure Energy]

The DNC did not screw up. Everyone assumes they did - but the national party has to maintain some sort of control over the primary schedule. If not - you would get what is essentially a national primary sometime in Novemeber, a year before the election because every state would try to be the first, or at least try to be early enough to mean something.

If it wasn't DNC Leadership at the State or National Level who's to blame? Or do you believe it's the FL and MI situation is a non-issue?

 

[Severum]

If it wasn't DNC Leadership at the State or National Level who's to blame? Or do you believe it's the FL and MI situation is a non-issue?

The DNC is national level, state party leadership is separate. The FL and MI Dems should have chosen later caucus dates instead of going along with the dates chosen by state Republicans.

Florida and Michigan will not determine the nomination.

 

[JimEverett]

Right - the state Democrats didn't feel any need to move it back because they did not anticipate the situation we have today. They felt it was going to be the regular ole nominating contest where the convention means nothing.
They took the chance and now they are not only marginalized, they are completely out of the system. I think that is appropriate.

As far as having all, or even a majority of state primaries on one day - why don;t we just award the election to the person who raises the most money - cause that is essentially what will happen. Look at this cycle - Huckabee, who has raised relatively nothing, put himself on the map because of Iowa and continues to win states and delegates in large measure because of his win in Iowa.

 

[JimEverett]

I forgot to mention Obama as well. If there were a national primary day there is no way he would be even close to Hillary. His campaign has built up gradually, from Iowa to South Carolina and on. Before Iowa he was trailing in the national polls by 20% or more.

 

[LSSpam]

Right - the state Democrats didn't feel any need to move it back because they did not anticipate the situation we have today. They felt it was going to be the regular ole nominating contest where the convention means nothing.
They took the chance and now they are not only marginalized, they are completely out of the system. I think that is appropriate.

As far as having all, or even a majority of state primaries on one day - why don;t we just award the election to the person who raises the most money - cause that is essentially what will happen. Look at this cycle - Huckabee, who has raised relatively nothing, put himself on the map because of Iowa and continues to win states and delegates in large measure because of his win in Iowa.

Agreed. Huckabee's relevance and McCain rebound came as a direct result of early primaries, Iowa and New Hampshire, that the original "front-runners" in large part ignored, Romney and Gulliani. Mitch and Rudy are out, McCain and Huckabee are in. At the time of the Florida primary McCain and Huckabee were 3rd and 5th in money I believe as well (Ron Paul was 4th I think).