Can Clinton be disqualified for breaking the rules?

She signed the pledge, she agreed and even stated on record that MI & FL weren't going to count. How can she now continue to fight and divide the party, when in her own words, she states unequivocally that those races were void? If she dare took this to court, the judge would just throw her out - which is why she's had her rich friends do it for her (where the cases were thrown out, or in the case of MI ruled the election ruled invalid).

So what the hell already. Let her finish out the race, with the condition that if she continues to break and speak out against the rules SHE agreed to - she would get booted. I'm tired of her getting treated like some deserving, entitled Queen. And I'm sick of her republican games. We're democrats, damn it. Like it or fucking not - Hillary - WE ARE DEMOCRATS, we play by the RULES!

I'd laugh.

Like they did with Lieberman.

by refusing to nominate him for re-election.

}(

but I like it. :patriot:

Advocating for the disenfranchised voters in MI and FL doesn't count, that issue is up for reconsideration on the 31st.

Please be specific.

Any other questions, ye of little knowledge?

But she's trying to make an illegitemate primary count. She has every right to plead her case to the delegates, but her arguement is beyond flawed. She's not helping herself with this ham-fisted approach.

She violated no rules.

and she participated by leaving her name on the ballot. She broke the gd-dm rules!

The pledge outlived its usefulness for him after IA & NH.

pretending to suddenly be concerned about "representation" of all 50 states?

Do you honestly believe that if Obama had the majority of delegates in Florida, Hillary would be pushing to have them seated?

What happened to Fla. and Mi. is a mess. But Hillary trying to manipulate peoples perspective by claiming to be concerned about the "fairness" of the election in Fla- really is repulsive, and shallow.

What bothers me is that her own supporters aren't calling her on it- Is this an example of how she would operate as president?


peace~

When Obama's position was more precarious, he was adamant that they not be seated.

Now, he has the luxury of appearing conciliatory.

I don't support Hillary trying to seat the MI or FL delegates. I have for months now called for the delegates to either be seated by the nominee (with the delegates not being a factor in the decided of the nominee) or for the pledged delegates to be split evenly between Hillary & Obama with the Superdelegates from MI & FL losing their votes.

But I am not gonna stand here and watch Obama supporters rewrite history about the MI ballot.

bullshit on the 'expedient' argument.

How many of the alternitave solutions presented has Hillary agreed with?

And sorry- you are the only one trying to re-write the MI history.
I replied to this below.

peace~

Where lobbyists are the worst people ever yet they can run one's campaign provided they are not currently registered.

Where leaving one's name on a ballot is the worst crime ever but campaigning in a state you agreed not to is ok per technicality.

this has squat to do with lobbiests.

You may be in such deep denial or desperation that you cannot see the problem with Hillary's manipulative actions, but the truth is out there for people who value it.

As for Obama "campaigning"- I think you are being disengunious to the extreme when you accuse HIM of breaking the rules.

Did he fund-raise in Florida?

Hillary cannot 'win' this race without using deciet. I sincerly feel compassion for what a dissapointment this is to her. But I would never be able to trust that the 'good of the people' would trump her own desire after watching this primary season unfold.

And I'm sad to say that.

peace~

Ya know that thing you guys are so adamant that Hillary ignored but apparently can't be bothered to actually know about.

I don't think Hillary can win. I think the contest is over.

But even in victory, Obama supporters do not get to rewrite history.

the campaigning you accuse Obama of doing in Florida was what? The fact that he had ads on national TV which showed in Florida?

Did he specifically pay for the ads to be put on in the state? Did he send out mailers etc?

If you're going to pick nits- pick them equally.

I don't think you can see beyond your disappointment. I'm not going to belabor this discussion.

I wish you well. Sincerely-

peace~

As long as the ads reach a significant portion of the punished state's electorate(in this case some 6.6M households got CNN/MSNBC).

For instance, you could run ads out of Alabama and reach huge swaths of the FL panhandle.

Got some proof to back that pudding up? And you're of course aware - so concerned as you are - that the ad played in Florida was a national ad and not just for Florida, right? Do you expect Obama to singlehandedly intercept sattelite signals going to Florida?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/09/voters_face_confusion_in_michi.html

They did so to blunt a Hillary win there - http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/michigan_clinto.html

As far as national ad buys & FL, he could have waited for his national ad buy until after FL voted. Its not like he had competition from other candidates there (none ran national ads). Also the DNC defines campaigning as advertising reaching a significant portion of the punished state's electorate, it does not have to originate or be limited to the punished state.

That is to prevent someone from say doing an ad blitz in AL reaching a huge portion of panhandle voters in FL.

NO Democrats were supposed to be on the Ballot. None of them. There were four candidates left on the Ballot - Gravel, Dodd, Kucinich, and Clinton. Dodd and Gravel had withdrawn from the race already, and Kucinich's paperwork to be removed from the MI ballot went awry. MI republicans refused to allow the four other candidates to put their names back on the ballot before the primary voting.

Hillary Clinton won MI because she was the only candidate on the ballot. Of course the other candidates encouraged voters to vote for "Uncomitted" - I can't help but notice you don't make note of Edwards, Biden, and Richardson also pressing for that.

So to recap. Eight Republican candidates pledge that Michigan won't count, for breaking the Party rules.
Four remove their names from the ballot, a fifth tries to do so, and two leave the race.
Hillary Clinton does none of the above, and is now claiming that she "won" the state.

If her claim to victory is that, due to Republican interference, she was the only candidate on a ballot that most Democrats in the state didn't even show up for, then that's pretty pathetic.

1) The deadline for removing one's name from the ballot was in early Oct so Dodd withdrawing from the race is moot (Gravel was still running though he was one of the few aware of that fact)

2) The other candidates never tried to put their names back on the ballot. Not sure where you are getting that.

3) Hillary was not the only candidate on the ballot. Kucinich & Gravel were still active (Kucinich even campaigned in MI) and Dodd's name got some votes as well.

4) Biden & Richardson had dropped out of the race by MI so there was no need for them to urge their supporters to vote uncommitted. Edwards did not have surrogates running radio ads.

This is the script of the John and Monica Conyers radio ad, which will be broadcast on Detroit-area stations. Monica Conyers is president pro-tem of the Detroit City Council.

MALE: THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IS CONFUSING. I WANT TO VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA BUT OBAMA'S NAME IS NOT ON THE BALLOT.

FEMALE: THERE IS NO ONE ON THAT BALLOT I WANT TO BE PRESIDENT.

MALE: WELL, THESE FOLKS CAN HELP US. EXCUSE ME, CONGRESSMAN CONYERS AND COUNCILWOMAN CONYERS, WE NEED YOUR HELP.

FEMALE: HOW CAN WE VOTE FOR OBAMA ON TUESDAY?

Rep. Conyers: YOU CAN'T. YOU CANNOT EVEN WRITE IN OBAMA'S NAME. IF YOU DO YOUR VOTE WILL NOT COUNT BECAUSE OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN CHOSE NOT TO PLACE HIS NAME ON THE MICHIGAN BALLOT SO AS NOT TO VIOLATE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY RULES. BUT YOU CAN VOTE UNCOMMITTED

Councilwoman Conyers: IF AT LEAST 15% OF THE PEOPLE VOTE UNCOMMITTED, THE STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY MUST SEND THAT PERCENTAGE OF DELEGATES TO THE NATIONAL CONVENTION UNCOMMITTED.

Rep. Conyers: MY WIFE AND I ARE VOTING UNCOMMITTED. WE WILL WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO MAKE SURE THAT UNCOMMITTED DELEGATES GO TO THAT CONVENTION TRULY UNCOMMITTED SO THAT OBAMA CAN COMPETE FOR THEIR VOTE.

MALE: THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN CONYERS AND COUNCILWOMAN CONYERS. I WILL JOIN YOU AND VOTE UNCOMMITTED ON TUESDAY.

FEMALE: ME TOO - AT LEAST MY VOTE WON'T BE WASTED

Councilwoman Conyers: THIS TRUTH IN POLITICS MESSAGE WAS PAID FOR BY FRIENDS OF MONICA CONYERS

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/09/voters_face_confusion_in_michi.html

I'll have to reconsider my sources :)

However, the core problem remains - Hillary was alone on the ballot, and a large number of voters didn't even bother to show up.

Do you think the Clinton campaign would be willing to go for a revote at this point and time?

But he thinks it should be done in a way that is fair to all the people in both states.

The Four State Pledge prohibited campaigning and participating. If "participation" meant only the same thing as "campaigning" then it would not have been specified. Lawyers KNOW this! This is a COMMON area of contractual law. The Pledge was a contract.

could take away her delegates I guess.

What kind of reprimand would be appropriate in this case? Not seating her delegates?

Let her annihilate her own political wellbeing with this bullshit.

Karma will make sure it is revisited on her tenfold.

Why can't people get this simple fact right?

The pledge and DNC authority are two separate things.

The DNC can remove any delegates a candidate wins if they campaigned in the state campaigning as defined by the DNC (it excludes fundraising). But the pledge's authority only extended as far as the state parties and even then the pledge was largely meaningless after IA and NH voted because those states had the biggest poles up their ass about being 1st in the nation.


In the end, the pledge obviously is about political convenience to both candidates.

Obama pretended that it necessitated his name being removed from the ballot in MI (tough to compete in a state purely on name recog) yet after IA & NH voted he sought permission to run TV ads in FL as part of a national TV buy. He also had surrogates run radio ads urging his MI supporters to vote Uncommitted, also post IA & NH. Notice the contrast in the severity of measures taken to adhere to the pledge.

Hillary signed it knowing name recognition would make her the odds on favorite in both states and could provide momentum going into SuperDooper Tuesday, delegates counted or not.

He, along with others, removed their names in order to NOT participate in the primary. Simply by having her name on the ballot - she was participating. Fail.

If Hillary "participated" in MI by leaving her name on the ballot, then Obama certainly "campaigned" by running radio ads thru surrogates in MI and running TV ads in FL as part of his national ad buy.

"He, along with others, removed their names in order to NOT participate in the primary"

He removed his name for a couple reasons

1) Richardson started this ball rolling and at the time he was doing decent in early IA polling and this handed him a nice asskiss for IA voters.

2) The bigger reason? Because by the DNC ruling he could not campaign there and the elections in MI & FL would largely be about name recognition. Why hand Hillary a press reported victory in MI & FL right before SuperDooper Tues?

It was a political smart move. Why Obama supporters pretend it was somehow honorable is quite funny.

A committee of the national Party is soon going to decide how the rule is to be actually applied in this circumstance; Sen. Clinton is simply lobbying to sway this decision in her favor as she conceives it.

which really looks more like this:

That she'll take it to the convention floor.

That is what we're discussing. Her breach of a written committment not to participate in those contests, and that they would be considered void. Again, by her own words - those contests would not count for anything.

No one at the time, including Gov. Dean, ever seriously considered seating no delegates from those two states. People did think the matter would be cleanly settled well before any ruling had to be made, however, so that it was viewed as no more than an exercise in future face-saving that could be safely punted on down the line like any hot potato. Even if the matter were to be decided wholly in Sen. Clinton's favor, which it will not be, that would still fail to secure her the nomination. There is more heat generated over this than it actually deserves.

That was the "risk assessment" (risk/reward calculus) she performed in choosing to actually "participate" when she promised not to do so. She knew she could get away with doing what secondary candidates could not. Remember, those Four States have Clinton surrogates in the 'leadership' of their state parties.

Could it be he realized it was a short sighted political stunt that could alienate MI voters?

So the Michigan ballot wasn't really a concern to him after that. I imagine it was probably a paperwork problem, as it was with Dennis Kucinich.

:shrug:

Wow, who knew it would take this fucking long!!!

So how Dodd did in Iowa had zero bearing on his leaving his name on the MI ballot.

There was no paperwork issue.

Here's Dodd's campaign comments at the time.

Dodd's campaign issued this statement: "We are committed to the importance of Iowa and New Hampshire going first, and we signed the four-state pledge to hopefully prevail upon the DNC and the state parties to add clarity to that situation. However, it does not benefit any of us if we are the nominee to pull our name off the ballot and slight Michigan voters."

http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/leaving_michigan_behind.html

would honor her word.

It would be hard to remove her name after the fact. She signed the pledge- she didn't go back on her word until after 2 of the 4 states had already held their elections.


I admit to being surprised and disapointed by her blaitent two-faced attitude.

And I'm not naieve.


peace~

Hillary's supposed crime in this is that she did not remove her name from the MI ballot (which had to be done by Oct).

After IA & NH voted, Obama ran radio ads thru surrogates in MI and ran TV ads in FL.

No Obama ads were run in Michigan until long after the Primary ... and they were national placements.

This is the script of the John and Monica Conyers radio ad, which will be broadcast on Detroit-area stations. Monica Conyers is president pro-tem of the Detroit City Council.

MALE: THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IS CONFUSING. I WANT TO VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA BUT OBAMA'S NAME IS NOT ON THE BALLOT.

FEMALE: THERE IS NO ONE ON THAT BALLOT I WANT TO BE PRESIDENT.

MALE: WELL, THESE FOLKS CAN HELP US. EXCUSE ME, CONGRESSMAN CONYERS AND COUNCILWOMAN CONYERS, WE NEED YOUR HELP.

FEMALE: HOW CAN WE VOTE FOR OBAMA ON TUESDAY?

Rep. Conyers: YOU CAN'T. YOU CANNOT EVEN WRITE IN OBAMA'S NAME. IF YOU DO YOUR VOTE WILL NOT COUNT BECAUSE OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN CHOSE NOT TO PLACE HIS NAME ON THE MICHIGAN BALLOT SO AS NOT TO VIOLATE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY RULES. BUT YOU CAN VOTE UNCOMMITTED

Councilwoman Conyers: IF AT LEAST 15% OF THE PEOPLE VOTE UNCOMMITTED, THE STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY MUST SEND THAT PERCENTAGE OF DELEGATES TO THE NATIONAL CONVENTION UNCOMMITTED.

Rep. Conyers: MY WIFE AND I ARE VOTING UNCOMMITTED. WE WILL WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO MAKE SURE THAT UNCOMMITTED DELEGATES GO TO THAT CONVENTION TRULY UNCOMMITTED SO THAT OBAMA CAN COMPETE FOR THEIR VOTE.

MALE: THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN CONYERS AND COUNCILWOMAN CONYERS. I WILL JOIN YOU AND VOTE UNCOMMITTED ON TUESDAY.

FEMALE: ME TOO - AT LEAST MY VOTE WON'T BE WASTED

Councilwoman Conyers: THIS TRUTH IN POLITICS MESSAGE WAS PAID FOR BY FRIENDS OF MONICA CONYERS

Posted at 5:45 PM ET on Jan 9, 2008

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/09/voters_face_confusion_in_michi.html

I find it funny that some Obama supporters who are unflinchingly "upset" about Hillary's participation in MI because she did not remove her name from the ballot think running radio ads thru surrogates or TV ads that are part of a national as buy is somehow OK.

Obama didn't campaign in Michigan.

If Obama's name or Edwards's name or Biden's name or Richardson's name had been written in- the STATE LAW would have required that vote be discarded- and the vote would NOT be assigned to a delegate to attend the convention. It had to be made clear that those folks who desired to express their support for any candidate which did not appear on the ballot vote "UNCOMMITTED" - and ONLY that way.

They paid for the ad- they had the right to name any of the unlisted candidates they wanted.
You can't pin this on Obama.


peace~

I love pretending that somehow the Conyers' actions had nothing to do with Obama or the campaign

y Sasha Issenberg, Globe Staff

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. – As Michigan Democrats go to the polls today, a Detroit consultant working to keep down Hillary Clinton’s share of the vote -- her only competition on the ballot is “Uncommitted” -- says the results should be seen as a referendum on her campaign’s handling of racial issues.

“If the Clintons don’t get at least 60 percent of the vote, I think it would be a total rejection of her candidacy,” said Sam Riddle, an adviser to Detroit city councilwoman Monica Conyers.

Conyers and her husband John, a U.S. congressman – both backing Obama -- taped radio ads urging voters for “Uncommitted,” which has become a consensus alternative for supporters of Obama and John Edwards. Riddle said a weeklong back-and-forth between the Obama and Clinton camps over the legacy of the civil-rights movement and Obama’s own drug use will galvanize black voters in the urban centers of eastern Michigan to deliver a no-confidence vote to Clinton.

“That type of stuff has no place in the campaign but it shows the Clinton desperation,” Riddle said. “They’re demeaning Obama and folks in Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Pontiac don’t like it one bit.”

With the campaigns respecting a Democratic National Committee boycott of the primary, the election-day ground game has become a proxy war between local supporters. Clinton has some of the state’s most prominent elected officials working on her behalf, including Governor Jennifer Granholm and Senator Debbie Stanbenow.

“’Uncommitted’ does not the get-out-the-vote apparatus that the Clintons have,” Riddle said. “We did talk radio, hit the churches -- much like you would with a candidate, except the candidate is ‘Uncommitted.’”

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/michigan_clinto.html

That was Conyers deal, and you know it. Just because he supports Obama, doesn't mean that Obama had anythign to do with the ads. Just as Hillary's 527's have nothing to do with her intent - right?

To pretend those ads were not campaigning for Obama is to deny reality as would pretending that 527's on Hillary's behalf exist for anything but her sole benefit.

Why do Obama supporters pretend this was something else?

Does it really kill you to acknowledge that your guy is actually a politician fully capable of making political moves?

Christ if he was some Mr. Smith character I would be worried about him getting outmanuveured left and right.

The Conyers move was a good one. Depress Hillary's name recognition victory and maybe even make the story about her failure to win big.

The MI ballot move was also a good one. He could not possible win MI when he could not campaign there. Why hand Hillary a victory? Without his name on the ballot, she could not even claim a straw poll result like she would be able to with FL.

is part of the grief process.
:shrug:
peace~

Voters in Michigan were told that their votes would somehow count. I voted...

Michigan Democrats are trying to spread the word that voters should vote, whether or not they choose a candidate on the ballot. Brewer said he and party spokesman Jason Moon have done nearly 100 media interviews, including one on YouTube and many on local radio. The party is also sending emails to registered voters.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/09/voters_face_confusion_in_michi.html

You both seem to have a big thing with declaring failure without actually proving such.

Obama is not seeking to change what the consequences would be for the 2 states if they persisted.

I think the consequences were poor choices- but they were the ones that were agreed upon.

peace~

here who violate the posting rules with dreary regularity and have to have their posts removed. No, rules are for other people in the World of Clinton.

and you all know it.

He had a national ad, which he sought approval for, prior.

Here's the link to Obama's campaign press stop in Florida THE DAY AFTER he signed that fucking pledge. I just LOVE the mea culpa, "If that's the way you feel, we can stop this right now" or whatever the hell he said.

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/30/obama-vows-do-whats-right/?news-breaking

What is being referred to is this

TAMPA - Barack Obama hinted during a Tampa fundraiser Sunday that if he's the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, he'll seat a Florida delegation at the party's national convention, despite national party sanctions prohibiting it.

Obama also appeared to violate a pledge he and the other leading candidates took by holding a brief news conference outside the fundraiser. That was less than a day after the pledge took effect Saturday, and Obama is the first Democratic presidential candidate to visit Florida since then.

Obama and others have pledged not to campaign in Florida until the Jan. 29 primary except for fundraising, which is what he was doing in Tampa.

But after the fundraiser at the Hyde Park home of Tom and Linda Scarritt, Obama crossed the street to take half a dozen questions from reporters waiting there.

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/30/obama-vows-do-whats-right/?news-breaking

You seem to be upset about this for some reason.

I am tired of the lies being spread (the latest was that the DNC specifically requested the candidates remove their name from the ballot).

Here's MI & FL in a nutshell.

Hillary had no problem with the DNC ruling and signing the 4 state pledge (two separate issue and controlling authorities) as her name recognition advantage would likely translate to victory (in the sense of press coverage and perception) in the punished states.

Obama's campaign also recognized this and once Richardson got the ball rolling, removed his name from the MI ballot (he could not do so in Fl because FL law requires one swear an affadavit that one is no longer a candidate at all).

Now we come to the actual MI election. Hillary had just gotten her big comeback win in NH and is looking at a kind of thumbs up or down vote in MI. A big victory while directly meaningless could have an effect on press coverage and perception with the voters though not as big as FL could since she was the only major candidate left on the MI ballot.

The Obama campaign recognizes the danger and seeks to blunt Hillary in MI even though they cannot do so directly. The "Uncommitted" campaign is born.

This was political manuveuring (by both sides during the events and by Hillary prominently of late) and had little to do with honoring pledges.

Calm down, man. Don't say something rash. It's almost over.

If they would have followed their own rules, we wouldn't be in this mess! See link below.

http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/5465

Prior to the start. It's wrong for Hillary to try and change that now, after the fact.

against the rules...yet.

You want to disqualify her from what?

I don't think even the Democratic Party can eliminate the First Amendment. Not even Senator Obama can do that!

"get booted" from what? Like it or not, Kitty, yes, we ARE Democrats.....We also "play" by the Constitution!

Nothing sadder than the deluded crying foul.

his and Edwards acting like a tag team.

To make political hay, they both, through inexperience and/or personal stupidity, pulled their names off the ballot of a major state in which both were presidential candidates.

Four Dem candidates left their names on the ballot.

Vis-a-vis the Conyers interview above, it is obvious that Obama was using a surrogate to actively campaign in Michigan when Hillary did not. Obama turned down an effort to get a revote in Michigan because he wanted half the delegates. He earned no delegates because of the Conyers/Obama ads that ran in Michigan.

Obama lies.

"I don't know no stinkin' Rezco"

He sat through over 900 Wright sermons and never heard one of them.

Have a nice day.

And in any other democratic society, it would.

What rules?