March 5th, 2008
06:02 PM ET

Should Michigan, Florida be silenced?

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/03/05/art.fl.univision.gi.jpg caption=" Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama at the University of Miami for a Univision debate in September 2007, Miami, Florida."]

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Don't silence more than 5.1 million Americans. That's the message coming from Florida and Michigan.

The governors of these two states, Charlie Crist and Jennifer Granholm, have joined together calling on the Democratic and Republican National Committees to seat their delegates. They say it's "intolerable" that the political parties have denied their citizens their votes, especially since Americans have turned out in record numbers to exercise this right.

But Michigan and Florida were penalized for moving up their primaries. Hillary Clinton is claiming victories in both states, despite the fact that Barack Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan and didn't campaign in Florida. She included both states in last night's speech as she rattled off all the "battleground states" she's won so far.

Clinton wants the delegates from Florida and Michigan to be seated at the convention, saying it would be a "mistake for the Democratic Party to punish these two states." Two of Clinton's backers – Terry McAuliffe and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell – are talking about the possibility of a re-vote in Florida and Michigan.

When it comes down to it, these delegates could make a big difference to either Clinton or Barack Obama considering that neither candidate can win enough delegates in the remaining contests without the help of the superdelegates.

Here’s my question to you: What role, if any, should Michigan and Florida play in picking the winner between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Anne from Texas writes:
The only role they should play is to sit home at night and read their copy of "How to Play by the Rules." They knew the rules and chose to ignore them. Letting their votes count now sends a very bad message to children: rules don't matter.

Roger from Florida writes:
Being a Floridian, I find it appalling that some jerks can set a date that impacts the people’s selection for the most important job in the world. The ones who moved our primary dates should pay for it. I also find it insulting to think that my voice does not count. Who are these people to take away my voice?

KB from Iowa writes:
The question should be: "What role, if any, do rules have in determining the Democratic nominee?" Everyone knew the rules going in. If you change them now, knowing full well it will favor one candidate over the other, the answer will be: Rules have no role in this process at all.

Josh writes:
Hillary Clinton agreed to the rules going into this race. Barack Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. At this point, the best course of action is to award the nomination to whoever has the greater share of delegates.

Flash writes:
Democratic voters in Michigan and Florida deserve the same representation as any other state. They should not be disenfranchised because the DNC is run by short-sighted, whiny boys. If the Democratic Party does not allow the Michigan and Florida delegates to count, every Democrat in both states should vote for McCain in protest.

Ken writes:
We should let the Patriots redo a couple of controversial plays in the Super Bowl while we're at it? The Democratic Party did this to itself. To have a redo or count delegates as they stand punishes those that did play by the rules.

Filed under: 2008 Election • Democratic Race
soundoff (378 Responses)
  1. Doug

    No one expected such a close race when this all began. Michigan and Florida should redo the vote and it should count.

    March 5, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  2. Brooke

    We need a compromise, somehow, somewhere.

    March 5, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  3. Jay in Houston, TX

    NONE, the rules are the rules. Everyone knew what the rules were going in. You don't change the rules once the game begains. What lesson does this teach our children & other countries?

    If you don't like the way things are going, look for loop holes & trickery ways to change or alter the rules. Haven't americans already lowered ourselves enough?

    March 5, 2008 at 2:58 pm |
  4. N.C. vidiasagar

    I think the results of their primaries should be used to assign the delegates.It will be great insult to the democratic process if they are excluded. If the are not included ,then the states should sue them .

    March 5, 2008 at 2:58 pm |
  5. Patti Groshon, Lansdowne, PA

    I think Michigan should be redone because all the candidates were not on the ballet. I think Florida should stand because all names were on the ballot and I think the Florida voters knew who was who. Didn't Obama "accidentally" have a commercial hit the airwaves down there anyway because it was part of a regional ad package that he purchased?

    March 5, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  6. tco in Hanover County, VA

    Michigan and Florida voters should have no more and no less role than any other voter in deciding between Clinton and Obama. I never have understood why changing the primary dates was such a big deal and why the DNC wanted to punish them. I'd think the DNC would want to keep voters happy in light of the outcomes in 2000 and 2004. Silly me.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
  7. Jack K. Fort Myers, FL

    If the Florida tax payers end up footing a bill because Mr. Dean and his gang can't live by their own decisions–there will be hell to pay in the general election.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
  8. Charles Liken, Lansing, MI

    As a person who cast a write in absentee ballot for John Edwards I watched my vote go right down the toilet. Michigan and Florida originally agreed to these rediculous rules and they should be held to them. Nothing should count, especially the super delegates as they were responsible for the mess.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
  9. Kristi from Indiana

    I can't stress enough how disaserous it would be if Michigan and Florida's delegates were assigned according to their previous primary vote. If the DNC wanted to somehow have a new Primary or Caucus in those states then I think people would be fine with that although in this crucial election year for the Dems any money that is not focused on the General Election may become a big disadvantage come November. I guess as long as the rules are followed according to the DNC election process we can't blame those states for wanting their votes to count. But let me tell you with all the talk of the Super Delegates taking this election away from Obama any action the DNC takes on this matter will be closely scrutinized!

    March 5, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  10. Brian From Fort Mill, S.C.

    I don't think they should have any say this election cycle. The DNC should follow through, and not capitulate.

    It's like grounding your kid, and then ten minutes later, giving him your car keys.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  11. Joe in DE

    Democrats can't afford not to seat them. Maybe they can work out a deal for some to go to Obama.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  12. Jim from B.C.

    This time they should be assigned official observer status at the convention, and next time around ... they should play according to the rules of the game.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  13. Joe in DE

    Democrats can not afford to not seat them. Maybe they can work a deal for a few to go to Obama.


    March 5, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  14. Kevin- Webster, MA

    Michigan and Florida knew the rules and still opted to be early. If the voters of these states are not happy they should oust the ones that allowed this. Having them count now is unfair and Clintonian. Kinda like playing a scrimmage and then wanting to count it in the regular season. Have a new primary or don't count them but you can't change the rules just to please one canidate.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  15. Jane Lawson

    The Democratic party leaders should visit a proctologist to find their heads. In order for voters in these states to play any role, new primaries should be held in both states. Barack Obama obeyed the rules and should not be punished for that nor should Hillary Clinton be rewarded for breaking the rules. Of course she's determined to get elected regardless of the consequences which will likely result in a win for John McCain.

    Lacey, WA

    March 5, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  16. Julie VanDusky

    I think Florida and Michigan voters should have the opportunity to vote in a new primary so that they feel they have a voice in the selection process. If we don't let them have that opportunity, they may not show up to vote in November or even worse, they might vote for McCain.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  17. Emma Lee

    None, these states primaries were held too early in the opinion of the Demmocratic Committee, so the delegates should not be allowed to vote in the convention. Or we can just let them in too, (why not? and compound the belief that rules do not matter any more in this country.
    Very few people think we have a say in anything or that there is any integrity left in the political system. Might as well take away any vestige of confidence.
    The committee should do away with the convention and just allow the popular vote in the primaries and caucus results tdetermine the candidates. Then we the people would have at least a small say in the process before the electoral college chooses the president for us.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  18. Terry from North Carolina

    Florida and Michigan should not have any role in picking the democratic canidate. Both these states violated the rules of the party.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  19. Annie, Atlanta GA


    The voters and delegates had nothing to do with the decisions of these two states in moving up the primaries, so why should their voices not be heard? A re-do is the only fair way to deal with this.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  20. john b

    I want to vote in may!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  21. Mark - Asheville, NC

    Hillary won them. She played by the silly DNC rules, and she clearly WON them!! Why should the voters of FL and MI be disinfranchised or have to vote again, just because the DNC can't get its you-know-what together?

    So the two states' delegates should go to Hillary, period. From here on, let's have winner take all, and get this over with! The republicans are laughing at, and profiting by, our ineptitude! Will we EVER learn how to win elections?

    March 5, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  22. Gretchen from Indiana

    Last I checked, Florida and Michigan were still part of the union. Maybe Howard Dean has a more updated atlas, though? Their citizens should be afforded the same rights and obligations as the rest of us. The good news for the people in those states is that Republicans are more than happy to count their votes come November. They will be heard one way or the other.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  23. Ron Richmond VA

    He doesn't have a chance of winning following the Bush policies. So, I guess a Woman or a Black person, wouldn't you think?

    March 5, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  24. Sandra

    The situation in Florida occurred to begin with because a republican governor made a decision that affected the democratic voters in Florida. How fair is that? Hillary Clinton followed the rules, however and the people came out and voted for her anyway.

    The people in both Florida and Michigan went to the polls to speak their minds and these votes should be counted. There should not be another primary in these states that is ignoring the will of the people that took time from their lives to go and vote in the first place.

    Who's in charge here? Last I thought it was the American People!

    March 5, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  25. idahosa

    florida and michgan should not play any role. let them face the consequence of their action and let others learn from it.

    if the DNC can't maintain a firm stand on this, then the party should break up and let the republicans have their way.

    "obedience is the first law in heaven..."

    March 5, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  26. Jamie Flaherty

    As a lifelong Michigan resident I would find it completely reprehensible for the state to request that its primary results be counted.

    Though several have skirted the issue, no one has explictly stated that the reason Hillary Clinton's name was the only one to appear on the Democratic ballot was because she made a conscious decision to Violate the DNC rules which she and every other candidate originally agreed to.

    Many have stated that the primary was unfair because other candidates' names did not appear, but the larger point is that they didn't appear because those candidates abided by their party rules, unlike Hillary.

    Why she would receive an exemption from those rules is bewildering. And it's shocking that there is even debate about rewarding her flagrant violation by counting the votes.

    Moreover, Michigan is virtually in an economic recession and cannot afford to put on another primary. Michigan's chance has passed. Now we should look onward to the 10 remaining states and try to unite the party.


    Jamie Flaherty
    Detroit, Michigan 48221

    March 5, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  27. David in Raleigh, NC

    They should either count the delegates that HIllary won during the Florida and Michigan primaries or they should reduce the total number of delegates needed to win by the total of Pledged and Super Delegates in both Michigan and Florida.

    A do over shouldn't be done because a vote today wouldn't represent the feelings of the voters at the time of the original primaries.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  28. David T., Toronto Canada


    As much as the cry for 'each vote must count' rings true in a Democratic system, so must rules, especially since they were agreed to in advance!

    So, there can be no modification of rules after the fact, except at the risk of making the party appear devoid of all credibility. And why is the party allowing ANY candidate to blame the DNC for this situation?

    Any candidate trying to force this issue – as Clinton seems hell-bent on doing – should be shown up for precisely what they are: a bit too much of a lawyer for their own good.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  29. Jeff, Galena, MO

    They shouldn't play any role, Jack. It was a known fact BEFORE the election that it wouldn't count. It was also known WHY it wouldn't count. If they decided to have an election and vote anyway, that's up to Florida and Michigan. It's also up to those states to inform or remind each voter that it didn't count. If the people voted anyway, that was their choice. If they were upset because it didn't count, that is something they need to take up with their state Dem. Party because the DNC told the states in no uncertain terms that it didn't count.

    Rules are nothing more than wishes if they aren't enforced.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:16 pm |
  30. James in Kamiah

    Let's hope my vote doesn't get shoved under the carpet by states who broke the rules. Then again, ... I guess that would be par for the course with these two parties.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:16 pm |
  31. Ron Richmond VA

    OK, there's the real question, Jack. And it seems that with the close race, they will have to count them eventually and that means trouble for Mr. Obama! Seems Hillary was right to campaign there when no one else would! Good Hillary, Bad Obama!

    March 5, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  32. April Love

    First of all Hillary was the only real candidate on the michigan ballot and she did not follow the rules of no campaigning in Florida which includes having a rally the night she won 55% of the popular vote.

    There are only two options that I see:
    1) Have a whole new election for both states
    2) Split the total number of delegates in half and give half to Hillary and the other half to Obama.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  33. Nicki, Detroit

    Greetings from Michigan - the DNC should count our votes! We've watched Nevadans have the privilege to vote at their workplace. New Hampshire also moved up their primary, but WITHOUT ANY PENALTY. Finally, we've watched Texans vote twice. With exceptions for so many others, the DNC cannot justify leaving us out.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  34. Mary

    Hellloooo! Knock, knock, anybody home?

    We voters in Florida have already voted. All presidential contenders names were on our Democratic presidential primary ballot. There is NO reason for us to have to vote again.

    Simply count our votes!

    As to Michigan, Hillary seemed to be the only one smart enough to put her name on the ballot. I say count her Michigan votes, and give the uncommited votes to Barack. I understand Barack supporters told the Michigan voters to vote uncommited anyway!

    There you go. Seems simple as pie, doesn't it?

    Mary, 1 of 4 Florida Voters (where the votes never seem to count!)

    March 5, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  35. William Henderson

    They need to do a do over. What is fair is fair. No way this represents a democratic process as to how it stands now. The sad fact is that if everyone had let it play out without eliminating them it still would have come down to Puerto Rico deciding it. Funny huh.

    Bill H. Long Island, NY

    March 5, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  36. J. D. in N.H.

    Florida and Michigan, in a rush to become what they considered "relevant," agreed to the silly DNC scheme that has resulted in them being irrelevant. Even if the game is replayed, how is it fair to Richardson, Kucinich, Biden, Edwards and Dodd, candidates who have already dropped out of the race? Edwards' populist message might have won him Michigan and changed the trajectory of the contest. I'm afraid they're up the proverbial creek and there's no paddle in sight.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  37. Kay

    Hello Jack,

    This is getting ridiculous. Wasn’t it decided and agreed to by both the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, that the delegates of Florida and Michigan would not be seated because the states went outside of party rules when they changed their primary dates? Both Barack Obama and former democratic Presidential candidate, John Edwards did not even campaign in those states following the mutual agreement of all to not have those delegates seated. And from what I understand, Barack Obama’s name wasn’t even on the ballot in Michigan!! What is Hillary Clinton’s campaign trying to do?! Rewrite the rules when it best fits their campaign? How fair and honest is that? Would she be arguing for those delegates to be seated if Barack Obama “won” in those states? And Jack, notice I placed quotation marks around “won” because if candidates like Obama and Edwards didn’t really campaign in those states, how can Hillary Clinton say she “won” any of them fairly. Her “Solutions for America” should come up with a “Solution” for that.

    Atlanta, GA

    March 5, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  38. John in San Diego

    Jack, the Democratic establishment will have egg all over their collective faces if they reverse position and allow the primaries in Michigan and Florida to count. And Hillary will weaken her position if she makes a whining federal case over those delegates. What should happen, however, is that the super-delegagtes from those two states should declare their intent to vote the way their state's or district's residents voted.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  39. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    The phrase; "You did it to yourself" really applies here. In all fairness, have a caucus before Pennsylvania and allow the candidates to spend some more money, after all they have only spent 1/4 of a Billion Dollars so far. Oh by the way have the caucus when HRC is out of the country for two weeks prior to the caucus that way maybe it won't be so nasty.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:20 pm |
  40. Diane, Barneveld, NY

    One word: NONE

    March 5, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  41. Mike Smith, New Orleans

    The state leaders of Florida and Michigan have little say in the matter at this point. However, the superdelegates should look at who these states chose and consider that the next president will probably have to win New York, California, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Texas and Michigan to beat John McCain. It's really a no-brainer.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  42. Michael "C" in Lorton, Virginia

    The rules were established by the Democratic party and both candidates, H&O, agreed to the fact that if Michigan and Flordia primaries were held before their appointed dates, that the delegates would not be seated at the convention. Each state decided to hold their primaries early, therefore there are consequences for their action. That is the price they pay for the decisions they choose. Funny how when one candidate is lagging behind in delegates, the urgency to incldue Flordia and Michigan becomes paramount. Even though the will of the voter will be void, they should not play any role in the nomination of either Obama or Hillary. They will have another opportunity in November to make their decision.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  43. Tom, Avon, Maine, The heart of Democracy

    I think the Chairman has it right. The rules can't be changed in the middle of the game. Politics has a bad enough rep as it is already. Joe citizen is just beginning to dare to hope, that would nip it in the bud.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  44. Sam Foster, Katy Texas

    None. They gave up their right and life should never benefit the spoiler, which is the roll they wanted to play. It is what it is and as the numbers indicate, they will not make a difference to the Clinton race so why bother? Put the Democratic party out of it's misery and let us have a candidate before we load up the Republicans to the point that we cannot win back the White House come November. A good question? Where is Gore? Edwards? anyone who cares about the Democratic party???They are letting this destroy not only the party but the election.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
  45. East Coast Canadian

    Michigan and Florida should not play any role in picking the winner. They knew the rules and broke them. The Candidates signed off on the rules to not count the delegates. Game over. Jack please write a new book on how to play fair and send a copy to Hillary.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
  46. Paul

    Michigan and Florida don't count and will not count but they will be at the convention. This game of "I won big States", "you can win without Ohio.." Imagine if Gore won West Virginia in 2000? There no big States and small States in politics.

    Chantilly, Virginia

    March 5, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  47. Linda S. Lamb


    I don't care what role these two states play in the campaign. All we can expect is more of the strident displays of temper, childishness, and egocentric crowing from Hillary Clinton. I am tired of her tirades and her less than subtle displays of her willingness to win at any cost. Our country is in desperate need of leadership, but all I have seen is political dirty tricks and I will not tolerate any more. She has never had to respond to any crisis; we have been duped. We need to remember why she was sent to more than 80 countries; her husband's administration knew the American people didn't want to see or hear from her. Texans and Hillary Clinton can two-step all they want; Ohioians can take pleasure in their defeat of Obama; but I am one Democrat who has never voted for a Republican candidate who will not belly up to Hillary Clinton's bar; I will vote for the Republican candidate.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  48. John

    What role should they play? NONE! The DNC knew when the primaries were being held, and the taxpayers in my home state of Florida paid 18 million dollars for the first primary. Now there is talk of a do-over? I voted, they were counted, and Hillary won. End of story. If these kooks think we are going to vote again, just wait until the lawsuits start flooding in from disenfranchised democratic voters against the DNC in Florida. It will make dimple chads look like microscopic specks of dust in the Florida Everglades. Howard Dean needs to think twice about what he is doing......he is not a king, and no one will tolerate him sitting there like a cheshire cat on a velvet pillow pontificating over the fate of Florida and Michigan.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:24 pm |
  49. Brandon - Wy

    You have got to be kidding me. NONE! One of them Obama was not even on the ticket and the other there was no campaigning or exposure to the candidates. If they want to count those states, make them re-vote, otherwise give it up. If they count them, it really will damage the party.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:24 pm |
  50. Christian Chicago, IL

    It looks like neither Obama nor Clinton will have the delegates necessary to officially clinch the nomination after the primaries and caucuses are done with in June. It is important that the DNC figure out a way for the people of Florida and Michigan to not be disenfranchised and have their vote count because if nothing is done, there is no way that they can win Florida in the general election. In what is expected to be a tight race, that could make all the difference as to who ends up in the White House...a la 2000. After Michigan and Florida have their votes count, then, and only then, can the superdelegates make the deciding vote if necessary.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:24 pm |
  51. Harry

    What role, if any, should Michigan and Florida play in picking the winner between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?

    The democratic party has made a mess of this whole thing.

    If they stick to their guns the republicans can claim those voters would count for something if they voted republican in Nov.

    If they change the rules, the republicans can correctly state that the democrats can't plan anything correctly, and they should not be in charge of the government. Imagine these guys taking care of your health care, Iraq, the economy and the list goes on,

    Imagine having to fund another primary. Talk about wasteful government spending, etc.

    What should they do.... fire the people that made this mess. Expecting these guys to fix it, would be a HUGE political mistake.

    Carlisle, Ky.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  52. Thomas, Tallahassee FL

    I am not an Obama supporter, but what's fair is fair. It is unthinkable that those two states could worm their way out of the consequences of their decisions when the consequences were clearly presented at the outset.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  53. Sharon, Washington State

    Seriously, was the DNC kidding when they said that the Michigan and Florida votes weren't going to count?

    "NO" means "NO" whether in sex or politics and you'd better mean it!

    March 5, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  54. Beth from Michigan

    As a Michigan voter my role was decided for me by people I don't know and never even heard of. It makes me mad when talking heads say "They knew what the rules were when they decoded to go early". Well, excuse me, but "they" didn't. I want my vote back.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:30 pm |
  55. Burt

    The Democrats raised hell at the Supreme Court for disenfranchising Florida in 2000. Will the Democrats do it this time themselves to Florida and Michigan?

    March 5, 2008 at 3:31 pm |
  56. Randy Porter Mo.

    I think every vote, from every state, should be counted. I`m not sure how the rules were made, but I`m pretty sure the average voter didn`t have a thing to do with it. Then on the other hand, If these votes are added to the corrent count, then Obama is going to be screwed. You can`t vote for someone if their name isn`t even on the ballot. I think the people should be heard by holding another primary in these two states. Who is going to pay for it? Split the cost between the two candidates, the two states, and th Federal Government. That way it`s not a major strain on any one party. We can send a Billion Dollars to any number of unknown countries,for unknown causes, so I`m sure we can foot the bill, for a small election to protect one of the few rights we still have.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:32 pm |
  57. Bob from Traverse city Michigan

    just magine if you will Jack what an exercise in futility and waste of time and money it would be if Florida and Michigan were both given a re-do and the primary still was a draw. These two candidates need to look at whats best for their party and more importantly whats best for their country and put their egos aside. The democratic party could win the white house for a 16 year term instead of a four year term if these two would just do the right thing.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  58. Michael Chacos Seattle, WA

    Jack: NONE!

    March 5, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  59. Terry, Chandler AZ

    I don't understand why the democrats of Fla and Mich refused to play by the rules that were set forth. Changing the rules in the middle of the game is not acceptable. Thus: Florida and Michigan should have no representation at the convention.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  60. Ramone F

    Michigan and Florida knowingly broke party rules. The results in those states are null and void no matter what. To include those results as they are (as Hillary Clinton wants) is a crime against democracy and I think we have had enough of those in recent years. Democrats must stand firm on this, or other states will attempt to break the rules again. If Michigan and Florida need to be included somehow they should either split the delegates in both states 50/50 or spend millions of taxpayer dollars organizing new primaries or caucuses and allowing time for the candidates to campaign in those states. Otherwise they should just be ignored. Hillary Clinton wants to seat those delegates as they are because she "won" those states (where her main opponent wasn't on the ballot and not allowed to campaign), but this isn't Russia where you get to win by default.

    Ramone F.
    Lithonia, GA

    March 5, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  61. Sabrina, Las Vegas, NV


    Their local party chairmans decided for them...
    It's a done deal.....

    March 5, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  62. Bill, Quarryville, Pennsylvania

    I think they should be left in the convention and their votes counted. Because these two states help will be needed in the presidential election which they might not get 100% of if they are not allowed to participate in choosing to candidate.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  63. Anne

    The only role they should play is to sit home at night and read their copy of "How to Play by the Rules." They knew the rules and chose to ignore them. Letting their votes count now sends a very bad message to children - "rules don't matter."


    March 5, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  64. Jim Bloom

    Time to end the bull fertilizer and do this according to the rules of the party. The Democratic National Committee can raise the money to hold a new primary or caucus in Michigan and a primary in Florida. It could easily be accomplished this June. In the absence of leadership, chaos develops. This continuing silence from the DNC is only creating problems. They need to step up and lead.

    Chicago, IL

    March 5, 2008 at 3:41 pm |
  65. Will K. San Jose, CA


    There were rules, the states were told the consequences and they still broke them. It's just that simple. How can a party aspire to running a country if they can't even enforce the rules of their own choosing?

    March 5, 2008 at 3:42 pm |
  66. Al, Kansas

    My fondest hope, yeah there's that hope word again, is that FL and MI won't matter. From what I've read, Clinton gets about 65 more delegates than Obama in those two states, and that might not be enough to matter. Wouldn't it be great if all of this hype over FL and MI delegates was just that, hype, and in the end they could be seated peacefully. Well, one can always hope.

    Al, Lawrence KS

    March 5, 2008 at 3:48 pm |
  67. James in Cape Coral, FL

    None, unless they re-do the primaries here. As a registered democrat in FL I would feel betrayed if they just went ahead and seated the delegates. We were told our votes would not count, so many stayed home and didn't waste their time voting. But now that Hillary needs a shot in the arm they want to change the rules. What kind of bakwords ass politics is this? You can't tell millions of registered voters that their votes won't count and then count them when it suits your needs, or can you? How can we try and spread democracy around the world when we can't even get it right at home?

    March 5, 2008 at 3:49 pm |
  68. Tammie

    Michigan & Florida broke the rules, they have no say.
    This should be a lesson to all , follow the rules!
    Grandholm should keep her nose out of things. She has no right to tell us MI voters who we have to vote for.

    Midland, MI

    March 5, 2008 at 3:51 pm |
  69. Marcus mt.olive


    March 5, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  70. Elizabeth in Gregory, TX

    None because Hillary can use it to her advantage while Obama and Edwards played by the rules laid down to them.

    Gregory, TX

    March 5, 2008 at 3:56 pm |
  71. mikeytherhino

    They HAVE to play a Role Jack. If they don't you are Telling Millions Of Voters that their votes Count for Nothing. And that is wrong and stupid in a way that could cost the Democrats the White house if they are not careful. They need to count those delegates, and they need to give a percentage of delegates to both contenders for the Presidency. The question then becomes how do you apportion them and make it fair? THAT'S a question that needs to be answered by Howard Dean.

    Mike From Staten Island, New York

    March 5, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  72. Terrance Craion

    As a Michigander, I want my vote to count and to be fair at the same time. We, the voters, should not be penalized because some politicians (from both sides) got too creative for their own good! I am in favor of redoing the election and before someone says it is too expensive, please tell me how it is possible to spend 60 million dollars to blow a spy satellite out of the sky, but we cannot afford the money to make sure that every American's votes counts! Also, please inform Sen Clinton that she did not win Michigan because the other major candidates were not on the ballot!

    Detroit, MI

    March 5, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  73. LeeAnn - Lake City AR

    The voters voted – they had no voice on whether the primary was moved up or not – why should they be left out.
    None of the candidates had to remove their name from the ballot in Michigan. Both of the candidate names were on in florida and the playing field was equal – no campaigning. People watch news Jack – I am sure they did not miss the big hug and kiss the media was giving Obama – so he was actually at an advantage in that respect – not to mention he aired ads in Florida and Hillary did not.
    Let them stand I say.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  74. Ann, Newton, New Jersey

    The people have made their choice. Keep it the way it is.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
  75. Phil

    None. Everyone agreed to the rules and now there is no turning back.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:58 pm |
  76. Jason


    Democrats would be insane to not bring two very important states in the general election into the primary process. This will hurt them in November. It will be up to Howard Dean to broker a fair solution....Better now then when it will completely decide the election.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:58 pm |
  77. Jerry

    We probably won't have a voice due to Dumb (Gov. Crist) and Dumber (Howard Dean) trying to prove who has the biggest ego or other items. I rally don't know which one to blame, if it's Crist I hope McCain picks him as his running mate they would be a perfect clone for the two dumbies we have in office now. I think you'll see the honeymoon between Crist and the voters of Florida disappear very soon. He looks at himself as the great decider also.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:58 pm |
  78. Mark, Queen Village Philadelphia, PA

    Best of three Michagan vs. Florida Football games. Am a bitter Buckeye fan healing from two (too recent) national champianship losses to Florida and one to LSU. Would enjoy the excitement of winner take all.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:58 pm |
  79. Tammy

    If they hadn't moved up their primary, they could have played a very big role. Now, they shouldn't play any role.

    March 5, 2008 at 3:59 pm |
  80. Andrew Irvine, CA

    No way. They were disqualified for a reason. They moved up their primaries to have more influence. Allowing them to play a part in the decision would be like grounding a child only to let them go out and play half way through the day. They don't learn their lesson.

    Also, it would be unfair to Obama. He didn't campaign in either state because they were disqualified, and in one of the states, he wasn't even on the ballot. How fair is it to count them when there wasn't even a real competetion in these states...?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:01 pm |
  81. Michael

    I'm a college student in South Florida, and simply put there are many of us registered dems who did not choose when our primary would be. By counting us out, the democratic party risks alienating us completely, which would be a big mistake considering how important Florida was in the 2000 election.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:01 pm |
  82. Harry

    This is just a question...

    I know that Florida had other issues on the ballot, such as taxes, when their primary was held.

    IF the Democratic party were to hold another primary, would this potentially invalidate the outcome of the other issues, or will all of that become fodder for the legal system??

    I am trying to find out that answer.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:01 pm |
  83. Sandra

    Both were on the ballot for Florida, Clinton won Florida, she should get it and its delegetes.

    Redo Michigan Primary.


    March 5, 2008 at 4:01 pm |
  84. Brett

    Jack, it's obvious that Michigan and Florida, 2 of the 50 states in this country, should have equal role as each and every single state. We are comprised of 50 states, not 48...

    March 5, 2008 at 4:01 pm |
  85. Caleb Dupree

    The U.S. of American must unite now!

    I urge everyone to call you're local politicians and tell them to tell Barack and Hillary to stop battling it out and join together. Republicans have a nominee it's time democrats do as well.

    Vote Clinton for President and Obama for Vice President now! America needs a woman and an African American in the White House. The world wants it!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:01 pm |
  86. James - Miami, Florida

    We'd like to be part of the process down here but understand that there were rules. If a solution could be reached that is fair and agreed to by both candidates (although it seems that Mrs. Clinton didn't abide by the agreed rules in the past) that involves a primary after one or two weeks of campaigning – we'd have a huge voter turnout. The results that have been attributed to the democratic candidates are skewed and do not reflect the entire state constituents and should not be counted.

    Thanks for the question.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:10 pm |
  87. Steve (FL)

    Enough of the Rules are Rules argument......

    Look at the facts in Florida.....

    A overwhemingly Republican controlled legislature decides to move up the primary date....We the people did not ask for this....

    Please explain why the DNC chose to punish Florida Democrats for this when they had no control or say in the decision?

    Way to bite your nose off to spite your face DNC...Good luck winning in November when you basically disenfranchised all Florida Democrats for something that was not their fault....

    Republicans are just Laughing at us...Yet again.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:26 pm |
  88. Steven Mather

    All this talk that Michigan and Florida agreed to these rules is absurd. I'm a Florida voter and I DIDN"T agree to these rules.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:26 pm |
  89. Florio

    Count thos Floridians. No butterfly ballot, no bad punches, everyone on the ticket. Millions of people voted in Florida, without even one hanging Chad. How can you say to all those folks "too bad". Do you know what an effort it can be to get out and vote in Florida. Michigan is another story since Obama was not even on the ballot, Michigan should re-do.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  90. Rose, Atl

    I really believe that all states should count and would love to see a real race in those states. (Hillary wants the votes to count because she won on name recognition). Notice that she does not acknowledge all the states in the union always belittling the states that BO wins. And now believes that only what Ohio says matters.

    However, I don't believe in changing the rules mid stream. The DNC should stick to their rules.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  91. Tracey

    Florida and Michigan can only be counted if they participate in another vote. Since many people knew the initial votes would not count, they simply didn't show up. For Hillary to claim victory is kinda like a Castro claiming victory in Cuba. Her winning in either state has essentially no meaning.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  92. Drew Fabry

    I don't like the idea of American Voters being left out of the process. And we all know moving the primaries in these states was an attempt to make them more relevant in the process. But instead they are being left out, and in this case I am OK with that. Listen to your parties follow the rules they set, and you will be fine...stop being greedy, and in the end your states won't have to pay...time to grow up Michigan and Florida...

    March 5, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  93. Bob in Pinellas Park, FL

    When I registered my party preference as "Democrat", I thought I was showing preference for the Florida Democratic Party, not Maine, Iowa or California Democrat as we can all be different with different goals. The National Democratic Party has not right to tell the citizens of any state when, where or how they will vote after all this is a Republic is it not? Our votes sic Delegates should count and members seated no matter what State "WE" , are from. I AM NOW REGISTERED AS INDEPENDENT

    March 5, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  94. Linden Killam

    Michigan and Florida should redo their votes on April 22nd along with Pennsylvania. That would give the candidates plenty of time to campaign between now and then and we would have three decisive contests to watch on the same night.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
  95. Paul

    I dont want to see another situation where cheating in Florida played a major role in deciding an election. No changes should be allowed at this time.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  96. David - OH

    The delegates from Michigan and Florida should be seated at the national convention. Since Michigan voters could vote Unpledged on their tickets, Obama still could receive votes from Michigan. I'm not sure about Florida. I think it is ridiculous that 5.1 million peoples voices won't be heard because they placed their primaries on the wrong date. It is absolutely stupid. A state should be allowed to hold it's primary on a date that is within reason, which both Michigan and Florida did. Don't we live in a democracy? Isn't it's principle that all voices are heard? Democratic party SEAT THE DELEGATES FROM MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  97. Lisa in Florida

    Count the votes. I switched political parties this year specifically to vote in the Democratic primary. In Florida, you can only vote within the party you are registered with.

    Due to our Governor changing the primary date, we the people, don't count. Adds have run, debates were televised and covered in the paper and on the internet. The voting pubic is actively aware and participating in the process, shame on Howard Dean for railroading that process and not upholding that process.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  98. Dan in Lighthouse

    It is paramount that the rest of the country realize that the Democratic primary in Florida was moved by the Republicans in Tallahassee ,who, by the way, have a significant majority in both houses of our state government.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  99. stuart granger

    The election in Florida had both Clinton and Obama on the ballot, that is a fact! How can anyone not count such a large and pivotal state and so many delegates. I think the Florida results must be counted and their delegates seated, absolutely.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  100. Monica B.

    I am from Michigan. It was not my choice to move the primary dates. It is very disappointing that as an America citizen with the right to vote, that my vote in the primary does not count. I feel that it is my right, and it is being taken away because of a technicallity that does not effect me.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  101. Debbie

    States crying wolf. Sorry but that just doesn't fly. Florida and Michigan knew the consequences of their actions. To revote or to decide to add them to the count is wrong. Otherwise, there could be argument for those states that had other candidates involved to say my vote for Edwards or Dodd doesn't count now, so lets revote. What people should be doing is pulling together so ONE democratic candidate can be the CLEAR leader in the race to beat McCain.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  102. Mary Johnson

    WELL !! As a disenfranchised voter from Florida I think our votes should count !! The National Democratic Committee needs to sit down with our Governor and find a time in the next month or two when we can all go back to the polls and vote again. It will give both candidates a chance to campaign properly and fairly. The results would supercede the tally from January 29th and satisfy the National Committee's "rules" Most importantly of all, it would give Florida voters the satisfaction of knowing our votes were counted for a change. And YES, JACK !!! Floridians CAN COUNT. ( It should be the same for Michigan.) Mary from Sarasota

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  103. Jacques Casimir

    regardless of who wins, if this keeps going, the legitimacy of this candidate and possibly president will always be questioned. This must end by North Carolina or its going to be too late.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  104. David

    The candidates understood the rules when they began campaigning so the votes don't count. Period. Backdating didn't work for Enron, it doesn't work here. However, since those votes don't count then I see nothing wrong with a second Primary, which is what it would be and not a re-vote. I think it sets a dangerous precedent in several ways but at the same time I think there is too much power given to DNC (and RNC) in the primary process. I don't like the idea that non-elected officials can decide that 2 states and upwards of 8 million people (considering less than half usually vote) have no say in a constitutional process.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  105. Paulette Dallas,PA

    The delegates should be seated. If Obama did not put his name on the ballots – tough luck! That's his good judgement. If people really wanted him – they could have written his name in. If the situation were reversed and Obama won those states – he would insist that the delegates be seated. Hillary hadenough foresight to include these statesjust in case something like what is happening now occurred. That alone shows her experience!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  106. Maria

    How will the DNC be able to take the position that the hierarchy of the DNC (i.e. superdelegates) will have to follow the will of the people and thereby give Obama the election, when the hierarchy in FL and MI were responsible for disenfranchising its voters in this primary. The party in FL and MI made the error, not the people – so if you say the superdelegates need to follow the will of the people then you will have to find a way that the will of the people in FL and MI will be heard. There is one thing that you will hear loud and clear if the DNC tries to silence the will of the people in FL and MI – NO YOU CAN'T!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  107. edward



    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  108. Jenn

    This is asinine. If Hillary was ahead in the delegate count she wouldn't be worried about Florida and Michigan. She only wants them because she is not winning. Talk about a sore loser.

    The candidates all agreed on the consequences if Florida and Michigan held their primaries early. Mrs. Clinton cannot whine and get the delegates counted now just because she needs them. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game. That is just too "Bush-like".

    Jenn from Fall River, MA

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  109. Terrri


    I am sure that Hillary's group would love that, but the states knew what the punishment was and should accept it! If we can't follow through with our decisions then what does that say about our candidates?


    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  110. Jennifer McGuire

    I think it's offensive that they won't count the two states' votes. I'd be so angry if I lived there. You're basically saying their votes aren't important. Florida is one of the most populous states in the nation, so I can't imagine it not being counted. Remember how pivotal it's been in past races?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  111. Aaron Triplett

    They shouldn't play any role. The nomination process is a private affair of the Democratic Party, not a public election, and no one really has a right to vote anyway. The Michigan and Florida state Democratic Parties knew the rules and deliberately broke them. Not following through on the punishment would set a dangerous precedent for other states in the future.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  112. Phil

    I think it's terrible that the voters of Michigan and Florida will not have a voice in who is selected as the democratic nominee. They should take out their anger at the ballot box when it comes time to re-elect those officials responsible for moving the primary dates and thereby disenfranchising them.

    Having said that, however, it is irresponsible to now allow their votes to count when Obama did not campaign in either of these states. Unlike Hilary, he followed the spirit of the agreement made between all the candidates not to compaign in Florida or Michigan. You simply can't change the rules of the game after the game is over. We should have had this debate BEFORE the primaries in those states... not after the fact.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  113. Ben Hamilton

    The Florida andf Michigan delegates should be left out of play. They violated (in your face) an established rule on primary dates.

    If they must be counted (not recommended), then both states must pay for another primary at a future date.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  114. Matthew M. Lucas

    I am Clerk of a precinct in Florida and our total vote count was 1116. All the candidates were on the ballot and the only one who ran political ads was Obama. The Democrat count excluding those that dropped or left the nomination was as follows: Obama 84 and Clinton 201. We voted and the DNC should accept our totals.

    Since Obama ran political ads he campaigned in Florida. Now they want us to vote again which means he wants a do over. Jack do you agree with him?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  115. jim

    Shouldn't make a rule than change it. Florida and Michigan new what the price was.

    Personally I think all primaries should be held on the same day. It is not right for some states to select who the other states can vote for. The election process is not fair to all voters.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  116. Patrick

    No Jack, it is what it is & rules are rules it amazes me that the Clinton's will do anything to get back in the White House,theres no chance for her to win & sitting well with the "Clinton Machine"

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  117. Jeremy

    Michigan and Florida voters should have the opportunity to be counted because they are Amreicans and taking away their voice and their votes is unconstiutional. However, they should have to re-vote in primary's and the previous ones should not count. It was wrong to take away their vote, but Hillary should not get the delegates when she agreed that they should not be seated before the election started and she was the presumed winner, now they're supposed to count for her when she needs them and Obama wasn't on the ticket in Michigan? Both of them should be on the ticket and they should agree to re-schedule during the election lull.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  118. Ann

    I think that both states should be counted!!! They voted the DNC knew they were holding primarys and did not do a thing!! COUNT THEM. Of course the big cry babies that thought that you don't have to fight for something you want is getting left out. I honestly think Obama is acting like he should be crowned right now. The media including your station beat up Hillary so bad its a wonder anyone went out and voted for her this past tuesday!!! Shame on the media.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  119. Big Bill from Brooklyn

    How about a "do-over" of the Florida vote in the 2000 Election? You know, the one where the Democrat had half a million more votes than the Republican, a Holocaust denier got votes on butterfly ballots from Holocaust survivors, hanging chads weren't counted, and African-American voters were turned away from the polls in droves before the United States Supreme Court - you know the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT one - told the Florida State Supreme Court to stop the counting and awarded the Presidency to Bush. Oh, that would be wrong? Sure. Right. By all means, let's have Hillary get Florida and Michigan votes now that they violated the rules. Clinton and Bush: YUP: American deserves'em. Thank goodnessfor Ralph Nader. He screws things up but admits that's his intention.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  120. Dennis

    Hi Jack,

    I'm voter and I didn't move anything. Why sould the voter be penalized for a decision made by a big shot?

    Lansing, MI

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  121. Brent Keaner

    Jack, im from michigan, and i cannot tell you how upset i am by the fact my voice has no opinion in this extremely close election, yet we have to live with that president. Clinton, is claiming she won my state, however Edwards and Obama were not even on the ballot. If she wants to claim her "victory" here then we should be given a re-election and then see who really wins Michigan.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  122. vivian


    DNC should figure out a way to hold an emergency primary or caucus on these 2 states so that everyone is on a level playing field. I do have one more gripe- why does the media refer to this as a victory for Hilary when she only won 12 more delegates? Statistically, that's a wash right?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  123. John in MN

    Here we go again, Florida will force this all the way to the Supreme Court so we can have them pick our president yet again......

    March 5, 2008 at 4:29 pm |
  124. Carol - Marietta, GA

    Give the delegates to Hillary!! This country does not need Obama. He will not win against McCain and the Democratic Party needs to elect the nominee who can stand up to McCain and Hillary is the one. Obama try again in 8 years.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  125. Hpst

    A do-over in Florida......what a shocker!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  126. Ron D.

    If Hilary is truly claiming tht she has carried these states, then she has lost my vote if she gets the nod.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  127. Brian in Laguna Beach

    Either do it over, or play by the rules. There is nothing worse than than changing the rules of the game half way through...........

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  128. Wilbur Williamson

    With all the monitoring of foreign elections the US has done, we need to call in a monitor from another country to decide how to handle this dilemma. I'll bet Vladimir Putin is available, and would be willing.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  129. Strazzy

    Rules are rules. They told them not to do the early primaries and they did.
    I honestly believe that they thought there would be no consequences and now they are mad that there is.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  130. HarshV

    You don't change the rules mid way through the game. Thats the basic premise of fair play and decency, which is a cornerstone of the institutions of this fine country.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  131. Ron in Greensboro

    Florida has become the new Chicago when it comes to any kind of election. It really doesn't matter what results were released; I have zero confidence in them.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  132. Kathy

    Florida and Michigan should have a re-vote. Since the first election didn't count and since they are now voting after all the other states, what's the fuss?

    Put both of them on the ballots and let them duke it out the good old fashioned way.

    It would be a huge mistake to silence these two states.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  133. Pamela

    Everyone agreed but now that it favors Hillary of course she wants them counted. How could anyone justify couting them when Barack's name wasn't even on the ballots and no campaigning happened. Talk about not right! If this happens I will quit voting Democratic.

    Newton, MA

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  134. Omar N

    It is an unfortunate position that the DNC finds itself with respect to Florida and Michigan. Notice the Republicans have been noticeably quiet on this issue. If the delegates are not represented at the convention, Senator McCain will have a lot of ammunition during the general election to portray the DNC as having silenced voters in Michigan and Florida. It is a difficult problem for the democratic party to solve but Senator Obama has to be very careful to find the thin line between arguing against the delegates and arguing against the people.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  135. Kevin

    As a resident of Michigan, here's my opinion: Don't seat the delegates; don't hold a revote. State politicians knew the consequences when they decided to change the date of the primary. To seat the delegates would be unfair to Obama, and to hold a revote would undermine the rationale used to change the date in the first place. Granholm made her bed, now it's time to quit crying and get to sleep.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  136. Kathy Corey

    The voters in Florida and Michigan voted on primary day. They had no control over picking the day.

    The decision by the DNC was undemocratic. We are not the party that suppresses votes.

    In Florida it was a level playing field. All the candidates names were on the ballot and no one campaigned...although Obama did have some air time due to a regional ad buy.The results in Florida should be accepted as is and the delegates awarded accordingly.

    In Michigan some candidates, including Obama, chose to take their names off the ballot. No one made them. Hillary should get the votes she got and the undeclared should go to the convention as undeclared.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  137. Rick

    The Voters did not pick voting day in Michingan and Florida. Elected officials did. The voters turned out, and cast their votes. Those votes deserve to be counted. The party was wrong to penalize these voters by saying their votes dd not matter. All candidates should have been on the ballot in these states. What they've done here is rediculous dirty politics.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  138. Allen Vancouver

    The clintons keep trying to change the rules to fit their needs. If hillary was winning Florida and michigan this would not be an issue. I actually used to like the Clintons before all this started, But this constant whining is starting to really turn me off both of them.

    The rules were in place when this all began, these are the rules the process should be decided by. Hillary ran a very bad campaign from the beginning and it's now coming back to hurt her. Asking now to put Michigan and Florida back in play is just sour grapes.

    Play out the process and let the chips fall where they may, Then the loser should bow out with class.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  139. Janet - MiamiFL

    It would be unconstitutional for our states not to voice. Seat our Delegates! This is too juicy!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  140. stanley stuart

    Seat the Florida delegates. Don't do the kind of damage to florida that was done in 2000!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  141. Tony Scarano

    This is typical Clinton politics. First agree to the rules, then change your mind once those very rules work against you. The DNC made their rules, and they are what they are...then again..that depends on what your definition of "are" is, isn't it?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  142. Don - GA

    Rather than a re-vote maybe the DNC should just state HRC is the primary winner and save a lot of money and time. This would save face from having to watch Hillary steal the election at the DNC via super delegates. It would be better to have democrates mad at the DNC now than Hillary later.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  143. Bill in New London, CT

    We have to pick one way or the other. Hillary's camp says we need to respect the rules when it comes to letting the super delegates vote for whom they want, but then says Florida and Michigan should count, which would be changing the rules. So, if we change the rules for Florida and Michigan, we can just throw out all the rules and tell those pesky super delegates they have to vote for whomever is leading in the pledged delegate count. At this point, I think they should make a deal and run Hillary (although I support Obama) with Obama as the VP. That gives us a gaurenteed 16 years in the White House, enough time to heal the wounds Bush and the Republicans have caused.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  144. Jamie

    Fair play means playing by pre-estbalished and recognized rules.

    Nobody wants the electorate disenfranchised but the Democratic party officials for Michigan and Florida should hide their faces in shame.

    I do think a compromise will be found and if not then I expect it to get nastier a la Clinton. (Winning nasty if need be)


    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  145. Jon

    "Every single vote counts". I guess they must've whispered except in Michigan and Florida.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  146. Maureen

    It would hurt the democratic process to now allow those votes. There are probably thousands of people who didn't bother to vote because it was know FL and MI were not being counted. Its not like it was a surprise. The states knew the DNC was not counting their delegates if the primaries were moved up. Of course Hillary wants those two states counted, why wouldn't she, she "won" them both.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  147. Payson Adams

    Millions of Florida and Michigan voters left their homes, stood in line and voted for their candidate. They expected their vote to count. I doubt they felt that their actions and votes were to be for nothing. The vote is more important than the DNC's procedures. If the vote was legal according to the U.S. constitution then their votes should be counted.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  148. Jerry

    We will probably have no voice in the election. Could it be that Gov. Crist and the Republican legislature changed the election date knowing that the DNC would throw out the Florida delegates thereby taking votes away from Clinton which would reduce her chance of winning the nomination. I wouldn't put it past the Republicans, wouldn't be the first time they robbed the democrats in Florida.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  149. Jason Kilpatrick

    First of all – the sheer existance of primaries is stupid. By design, these primaries give extra weight to those who hold their primaries early. By the time some states vote, the primary is already over...so why bother? Everyone should vote at the same time...and results should be released at the same time. Simple as that.

    Second of all – what happened in FL and MI is terrible but the crux of the problem can be seen above. The votes not counting is the result of the DNC wanting to wield its power as opposed to the states pressing to have their voice matter...and now that the votes are in a certain direction...I am sure it will get all Clintoned up.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  150. William

    I think Florida and Michigan should count. They should count as they are- the way the votes are now. To say that they were not allowed to campaign in those states as an excuse is rediculous. The voters in both states went to the polls with plenty of information about the candidates. Those who really care about politics certainly had been watching and listening to CNN and all the other news agencies and made their decisions based on those facts. To me, I would say that these votes show more of how the electorate really feel. Also, it is my understanding that Obama's campaign did have a couple of ads that ran in Florida, against the rules I may add. Their excuse had something to do with the cable company that was running the ads. Just another excuse after the fact. I know that Michigan only had Clinton on the ballot, but that was because she did not ask to have her name removed and she should not have . It was Edwards and Obama who decided not to have their names on the ballot, to me that shows very poor judgement. So let the votes stand as they are and count them as such. Michigan, well you can give Obama and Edwards a proportionate amount based on the previous races that they were a part of.
    There has been so much talk about record turnout and the same happened in both of thoese states- so to say you will not let their votes count because of a stupid decision by the DNC is absurd. Do you really think they would have come out in droves the way they did if they really thought their vote would not count. If you think campaigning would have changed things I doubt it. At the time of these races the race was about who people wanted and not about race as the media turned it into.
    William in Roanoke, VA

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  151. brad napier

    I am from Michigan and i feel that florida and michigan delegates should count, how can people say that the people decide and then they dont let some of the peoples votes count?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  152. Adam


    The answer is absolutely not. The Democratic Partys in those respective States knew the conequences of moving up their primary dates and they did it anyway. As much as Hillary would like it, you cannot change the rules in the middle of the game. No one seems to be asking about all of the potential voters who would be disenfranchised because they didn't show up to vote because they thought their votes weren't going to count. How do account for those voters? This is a lost a cause for Hillary and it will be a travesty for democracy if the DNC seats these delegates. Howard Dean needs to be firm on this issue or he risks looking like Hillary's lackey.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  153. Jill

    As a resident of Florida and a democrat who voted in our primary, I think it is UNAMERICAN

    March 5, 2008 at 4:30 pm |
  154. Eric

    let Florida's and Michigan's primaries count? Thats exaclty what we need to do, reward states for breaking the rules. that will set an excellent precedent. I also think it would be very fair to have these states decide the democratic nominee especially since obama wasn't even on the ballot in one of these states come on a first grader could tell you this election is turning into a joke, and I'm becoming disgusted.

    Huntington WV

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  155. Max Robinson

    To Jay in Houston; You don't need to teach any lessons to othe countries. If anything, your country needs to be taught several lessons.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  156. Tom

    This article makes one flawed assumption – that there is a right to vote in a primary. Citizens have the right to vote in general elections, but parties decide whether to allow primaries. Thus, no one's rights have been violated.

    That said, I think the RNC's solution was better – it made the states count, but only half as much.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  157. Luke

    You must go back and have a primary, with Sen Clinton and Sen Obama on the ballots. Because a primary was moved up, 5 million people do not get to exercise their constitutional rights? This is supposedly a democratic society, let the people vote who want to vote. The Democratic Party is turning into a joke – the possibility that Super Delegates could alter the outcome of what people want, nominating a candidate for President when two states didn't even have input – not listening to the mandate to stop the war after the most recent election. This is one Democrat who is embarrassed to call himself a Democrat right now. McCain doesn't look all that bad........

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  158. Cynthia in Santa Monica, CA

    The Democratic Committee is just mind-blowing these days. They are hell bent on self-destruction. I am an independent and, if Hillary Clinton loses, I will vote for a McCain.

    The idea that American voters cannot have their votes counted is absurd. Perhaps the State Officials should have sought out another way to change the dates of their primaries. Perhaps the Democratic National Committee could have been more tolerant of the desires of those two states to change the dates. Somewhere in there the possibilities for compromise were hidden and neglected. But to strip and American of their vote is out of the question.

    Why are the citizens, the voters, being punished for this lack of judgment on the part of the officials? I, for one, would not sit quietly and let the state of California take away my vote over a stupid technicality. And many of us expect the citizens of Michigan and Florida to rally together and make some noise to get their votes counted.

    The last time I checked, protesting was also the right of Americans, along with voting. Good luck Florida and Michigan!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  159. Tom

    Really, you know this is going to come down to Obama supporters saying "don't count them" or "vote over" and Hillary supporters saying "count 'em up!" and either way it's going to be the superdelegates that decide it – unless the rest of the party can find a deal that will motivate the two of them to run together for the betterment of the party and do it soon, thereby destroying any advantage McCain might have from wrapping it up yesterday. To do that, both sides need to be convinced that winning the war (Presidency) is more important than winning the battles and the only way they win the war is to fight side by side starting soon.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  160. Mike

    Either Michigan and Ohio need to be counted, or their PRIMARIES need to be done over, caucuses are not sufficient. Did a few high ranking officials change the dates of the primaries? Yes. Was that the personal decision of these 5.1 million Americans? No. Had the primary dates stayed the same would these Americans have still voted? Yes. It is unjust that Americans would be told their votes don't matter because officials with out their permission changed the date for their primary. And as far as candidates not being on the ballot, it was their decision to have a temper tantrum and pout about the date change, why should costly primaries be re-done because they decided not to be on the ballot in the first place. It seems the only compromise attainable would be to re-do the primaries with Clinton & Obama on the ticket, let them campaign, and seat the blasted delegates. However in all fairness, Americans already voted and the delegates should be seated based on how Michigan and Florida have already voted.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  161. Carmen H from Seattle, WA

    While I feel for the people of Michigan and Florida, and understand their desire to be part of the process, you can't change the rules mid-game.

    If the Democratic Party *itself* can't do what they say they will, what sort of leadership does that provide for it's candidates?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  162. Luke

    Here's a suprise, Democrats wanting to change how votes are counted once the result is known. Haven't we learned anything from the 2000 and 2004 elections?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  163. Casey


    While MI and FL both did their primaries out of order, you cannot deny the fact that it (the primary on January 29th) WAS the deciding factor for several candidates to drop out. It made all future choices for the presidency much clearer.
    Lets either seat the delagates as they were voted or hold another another primary. There was a record turnout here in Florida even knowing our votes may not count.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  164. Ian

    Let the Michigan and Florida votes count. If they look deep enough they may even find that's where Dick Cheney has been hiding. At least he's not hunting!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  165. Lance

    I don't understand the logic of "can't ignore those million of voters". They went to vote on the wrong day, so their votes are not counted. As simple as that. Want it to be counted? go vote again on the right day. If you seat those delegates now, by next election, all states will move their caucus/primary up to Jan 3rd.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  166. Elaine

    I live in Michigan and did not vote in primaries because only Clinton was on the ballott which I felt was giving me a choice. Either Michigan should not be counted or it should be redone with both Obama and Clinton on the ballot.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  167. Rich K

    The DNC told both Florida and Michigan what would happen if they moved their primaries. They ignored the warning and as a result lost their delegate seats at the August convention. Of course, Hillary Clinton wants the delegates seated, but had the results been reversed she would be singing another tune. I find it laughable that she keeps touting those states as wins when Barack Obama was not even on the ballot in Michigan and did not campaign in Florida.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  168. Rolf

    Actually for the people who say, the rules are the rules. The rules are preliminary until they are actually approved by the conventions. The rules as proposed by the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee are "recommendations" until the respective Conventions approve, amend, or substitute other rules. Once the delegates are seated from uncontested delegations, the Conventions as assembled will decide what the rules are, and who else may, or may not be seated. Contested delegation fights are not new, and shouldn't be seen as all the unusual.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  169. Michelle M

    I think a true democracy should respect what people vote for and what people stand for. Not counting those votes is fundamentally wrong. I understand the rule self-imposed by the democratic party. But given how close this race has become, we should use all the numbers, all the delegates we've got. To be fair, however, I think Michigan should be re-done because not all the names were on the ticket. And count the outcome from Florida. The lack of campaign or presence on either state should not be reason to question Florida's results. Both, Clinton and Obama had enough exposure through CNN and other media to validate Florida's outcome.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  170. Brad Nicholas from Florida

    As a Florida democrat who votes absentee because I go to school in Kentucky. I feel that my vote should be counted and that the elections should stay the way they are. It was Obama's choice along with Edwards to take thier names off the MI ballot so it should be MI choice to give thier delegates to Hillary. FL delegates should be based on the vote that was taken because a revote would undemocratic and so it should stand. If my delegates do not get placed I will be very upset at the DNC!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  171. Eric Athearn

    I'm a Florida resident for Obama. I voted for Edwards in the primary. I do not think the rules should change, after the fact. If the rules do change, and the nomination does not reflect the popular/pledged delegate vote (i.e., the nominee attempts to pull strings or change the rules half way through the contest), I WILL NOT vote in the general election. I will lose all faith in the democratic party and this election process.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  172. Erin

    I don't believe that MI and FL's delegates should be counted - RULES are RULES - wait maybe not, based on the way the country haas been run the past 8 years, apparently we can do anything to advance our own causes.

    Is it fair to have a "revote" when the candidates at the time of MI and FL primaries are no longer the candidates of today? How fair is that to John Edwards (or any of the other candidates that have dropped out based on primary results)?

    If Hillary becomes the Democrat nominee - be prepared to have John McCain as president.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:31 pm |
  173. Jack - Austin Texas

    Unless they have caucuses to re-vote (primaries will cost the tax payers) then they should have no role. The rules, and consequences were clearly laid out in advance of when the decision to move up the primary was made. Besides Hillary can use it in the future to cry that it was part of the vast right wing conspiracy reforming against her. Ive already heard it was the Republicans fault.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  174. (A different) Doug

    The national party should stand it's ground.
    Michigan had only Clinton, Gravel, and Kucinich on the ballot and that should not even be allowed to stand.
    In Florida, Charlie Crist threatened to veto the bill moving Florida's primary unless they specified the date January 29, even though BOTH national parties warned that no delegates would be seated if the date was moved before February 5, Super Tuesday. Florida's delegation should not be seated at the convention and all states will learn the lesson.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  175. Mike from Syracuse

    After all the whining the Democrats did in 2000 over a few hundred hanging chads, they'd be the world's biggest hippocrits if they let several million voters be disenfranchised. But then again, they're Democrats, so hypocrasy is just par for the course.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  176. Ray

    I say let the votes count. The people voted , now let the votes count. By the way,why did Obama deside to use God at the end of his speech last night. I have listened to a load of his speeches , that was the first time I have heard him say God bless you and God bless the USA. Look back thru a few tapes and see if you can find any.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  177. Andrew

    You've got to be kidding to even lend credibility to this idea.

    Everytime the Obama camp brings up the unfairness of superdelegates possibly trumping the popular vote, all we hear is that "Rules are rules", and that "Everyone knew the rules from the beginning."

    Yet following the same set of rules from the same DNC is now regarded as "silencing 5 Million Americans"?

    Howell NJ

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  178. douglas in orlando

    jack, I took my time, left work, to vote in the florida primaries. i see you have people all over the us saying that my vote shouldn't count. it is not my fault that crisp(republican gov) made the decissiong to move our primary up. Further more, obama had national ads and national press coverage on his big win in Iowa playing in this state, Hillary had no ads. She still won huge. Ya know why, the hispanic vote. Obama don't want this state counted, and his supporters for that matter, because he can't win in a spanish state. and believe me there is alot of spanish here. So i don't blame obama for not wanting this, I just wonder if this was an african-american state would he feel the same.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  179. Gail

    I'm from Michigan – and I purposely did not vote in our primary because my candidate of choice was NOT on the ballot. It was not the general publics choice to move the primary – it was the state government. So fine – the state broke the rules – that's fine our votes shouldn't count. But if they are added – they need a revote because there was a huge amount of voters that were wanting to vote for people not on the ballot or only voted because there was basically only one choice – Hillary. The politicians in the state and Democratic party need to get it together. Its been a big joke – I want my vote heard but so far it doesn't matter at all.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  180. Brian, Tampa, fl

    They should have stick to the rules, it would be a revolt if either side
    tries to blind side this election, that wolud means Sen McCain will win
    by a landslide. Many unhappy voters would elect him.
    This is just dammmm UGLY.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  181. Scott

    I think that both states should be kept off. Both of them were warned that they would suffer consequences if they moved their primaries up. They made the decision to move them, and now they should have to face those consequences.

    In the alternative, both states should hold primaries again. For anyone to claim that Clinton should get Florida because "all of their names were on the ballot" ignores the fact that many people didn't waste their time going to the polls that day because they were told that the primary was meaningless. If there is a concern regarding disenfranchising voters, these people must also be considered and an entirely new primary should be held.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  182. Jason

    I think they have to revote- it's too close between Obama and Clinton, neither is going to resign easily. The democratic party cannot afford to give off the appearance of being unfair- if they don't count the votes already cast FL and Michigan will cry unfair, if they count the votes as is supporters of Obama will cry unfair. REVOTE, and do it soon.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  183. Marian

    I think Florida and Michigan votes should be counted, the voters shouldn't be punished for the inepititude of party leaders. I don't think it's a big deal, it's a primary not a regular election. Since tickets are so "hot" for political evets this year, put the party leaders in time-out rooms and raffle off their seats to people who voted in the primary. They surely have more common sense than party leaders.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  184. Jill in Gainesville FL

    As a democratic citizen in Florida who voted in the primary, I think it is UN-AMERICAN not to allow our votes to count. A re-vote would be fine. I do not see how a "committee" can tell me my vote will not count.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  185. jim

    Rules were broken and should be followed. The 2 states should not be counted or able to vote again for this primary. Only examples of repercussions will keep them from doing it again (especially FL). The only fair way would be to spilt ALL delegates from both states equally between the 2 candidates and let the nation as a whole determine the winner.

    Jim – Rockport, TX

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  186. James Orr

    Absolutely none, this is more Clinton chicanery. She would be screaming if Obama won both states and he wanted them to count. They knew what the situation was going into the primaries. You don't change the rules 75% of the way through. Incidentally, we wouldn't have this problem if all primaries were on the same day.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  187. Chad - Monroe Michigan

    A re-vote or redo would be the absolute last thing Michigan and Florida should do. In Michigan the highly unintelligent people, especially the governor, who run this state chose a different election date, knowing the risks. Now that the election is close, they actually think that people should run to the polls again? Who is paying for this? Jennifer has already ran our state into the ground financially. Now she wants us, the taxpayers, to foot the bill for a redo, because she wanted the dates changed in the first place? She needs to resign and go back to Canada. If McCain loses the election, maybe we could beg him to come to Lansing and replace her......

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  188. Mish

    It would be to expensive to have the delegates. Why not just hold a caucus. If you truly believe in your candiate do it in the open and not behind a curtain. Stand up and be counted. Not attend a rally for one person and cast your vote for another.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  189. Judy, Fresno CA

    I wrote to the DNC criticizing their decision to disenfranshise the voters of Michigan and Florida. Florida was crucial in the last few Presidential elections. Why would the DNC chose to alienate these voters? It was a bad decision and I was amazed at the time that it did not stir up greater furor in the media.

    Since all the candidates were on the ballot in Florida and there was tremendous turnout, that vote should stand. Michigan would have to be redone as only Senator Clinton was on the ballot.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  190. Joe in Indy

    If they don't like the consequences, then maybe they shouldn't have broken the rules. They knew what they were doing from the start. The voter of MI and FL can blame their local party leaders for being ... unwise.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  191. Stephanie A. Klitsch

    The people's votes must count, their word is their Vote. You can not silence 5 Million americans .

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  192. cam

    yes jack they should

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  193. Mary

    The primaries held in FL and MI should NOT count. Many people stayed home, knowing their votes wouldn't count, and others tried to vote on the normal primary day, only to find out the primary had already taken place. How fair is that? Clinton left her name on the MI ballot, since it "wouldn't matter anyway," and then swooped in to FL to claim victory. Now she wants the votes to count. How convenient, and how Clintonian. The disenfranchisement of these voters occurred at the hands of the states, not the DNC. If they want delegates to be seated, they should hold new, widely announced primaries, at the states' expense.

    New Haven, CT

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  194. GB in Los Angeles, California

    The voters should have their say in Florida and Michigan, but in a new vote. It would not be fair to use the votes that were previously cast, as everyone understood at the time that they would not count, and I expect that many people who would have voted if they thought it would count, did not. In addition to the fact that Hillary was the only one on the ballot in Michigan. Although a number of people voted Uncommitted, I'm sure many, many more did not vote at all.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  195. Christina

    If Hillary wins this by any means that can be construed as shady, and I think letting the votes count now, when they were not to count before, then it is the best gift they could give Republicans. It will make the Democratic nomination not even worth winning.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  196. Kristen

    They broke the rules and those same DNC rules allow them to hold another primary so that’s what they should do. But they should do it in an organized way so that both candidates can campaign properly. To suggest they shouldn’t count at all is just silly. (Stillwater, OK)

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  197. s.d.jayasuriya


    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  198. st_claret

    That will be a fatal mistake that will come back and bite the Democrats November. They better find a way to reassure the people of Michigan and Florida that their votes count!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  199. penelope salerno

    we are democrats not republicans count the primaries in michigan and fla. as they stand . their are no do overs just because you do not like the results the turnouts were record high to both .

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  200. David in Raleigh, NC

    The thing that amazes me is that the Democrats went to court after the 2000 Presidential election to make sure that every vote, dimple, and chad counted in Florida. Yet in 20008, the Democrats have decided to disenfranchise the voters of Florida and Michigan.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  201. Jerry of Michigan

    Both Michigan and Florida knew of the possible consequences of adjusting their primary dates prior to moving the dates forward. The rules were agreed upon prior to the primary start date and all agreed. Now that the Clinton machine is close to losing the nomination, these "votes" are now in question? There should be no re-vote (too expensive for the people of the states that ignored the rules), nor should they be counted (again for ignoring the rules). Next time play by the rules and be counted like the rest of the country. Sorry MI and FL, take it up with your state party's. Now sit down and shut the f*** up!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  202. Adam - Ohio

    The DNC should seat all the delegates from Michigan and Florida...but not until a nominee is decided. Every state deserves a seat at the convention table, but it entirely unfair to change the rules mid-game. How could anyone think it's fair to count Michigan's votes when Barak Obama's name wasn't even on the Michigan ballot? None of the candidates campaigned in either Michigan or Florida. No doubt the outcomes in those states would have been more competitive otherwise. If the voters in Michigan and Florida have beef, it should be with their idiot leaders who wasted their taxpayer dollars on a primary they knew woudln't count...or at the DNC, who in typical self-destructing Democrat style, stripped 2 major battleground states of all their delegates. At least the RNC gave them half.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  203. russ

    The initial reason for excluding these states was punishment for moving their primaries to an earlier date in an effort to gain undue influence in the race. Now that it is nearing the tail end of primary season, allowing a fair re-vote (with accompanying campaigning time), would no longer infringe on the issues of timing. Ironic, of course, that this result would still provide these states with monumental influence on the outcome.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  204. Tony P.

    Have Michigan and Florida said anything in contrition? What if every state wanted to jump to the head of the queue during primaries?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  205. R. Schwark

    The DNC needs to seat delegates. Whether in a revote, or some other way. It taints the whole process otherwise. They need a compromise that will give these states representation.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  206. Karen

    The voters of Florida and Michigan have the right to have their votes counted and their voices heard. It is not their fault that their states moved up their primaries or that the DNC decided to penalize the states for doing so. Seating the delegates based on the votes already taken would not be fair to the candidates who followed the rules of the DNC, no matter how wrong headed they were. The primaries should be redone.

    We need to have a clear winner of the party's nomintaion and to discount two huge states so important in a national election, and have this come down to superdelegates will forever tarnish the Democratic party and embroil it in the type of controversy not seen since the 2000 election.

    If the DNC is serious about winning the white house in 2008, it should think about how many Democratic voters in Florida and Michigan might decide to vote for a Republican instead. Does the DNC think holding to this wrong-headed penalty is worth it?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  207. Jennifer Wood

    This isn't a game, it is the future of our country.
    It isn't like one candidate took two turns at Monopoly, it is the political expression of millions of Americans who are looking for the chance to have a voice in what is best for the future of their country, their lives, and those of their families and children.
    Florida and Michigan's voices should be heard in some way, and if Obama really cared about taking the voice of the people to Washington, he would fight to take the voices of Michigan and Florida to Denver... one way or another.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  208. Rose from Cape Coral, FL

    Why should I be penalized and have my vote basically declared as invalid because of something that the Florida Democratic party did in changing the date of the state's primary? It isn't fair to the voters in this state. It is our constitutional right to vote for the candidate of our choice and they are denying us that right.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  209. monica

    Hillary won both states. She should get the delegates. The people's voices of these states should be heard they are citizens of this country. The states should not have been allowed to move up the date in the first place. But what do you expect from a Republican Governor. Florida loves Hillary and the people have spoken. Be fair and count their votes.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  210. Tom

    It was sad hearing Hillary mention Florida first during her speech last night. It further showed that she doesn't care about rules. As Obama says, "the whole world is watching how we conduct ourselves." This is real. This is a major point of November's election – our status in the world. He continues to take the high road. She continues to stoop to style and politics of old. All of this from an independent.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  211. Scott

    Why bother, the nominee will be selected behind closed doors at the convention anyway.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  212. karen mcguire

    hmmm..this sounds so familar...as in the illegals in our country not wanting to play by the rules...what ever happened to the rules are the rules?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  213. Marilyn Carroll

    Voting needs to be uniform in all states. Why did the people in Florida and Michigan bother to vote and waste their time? Change the dates and do re voting in both states. Our voting systems are archaic, time wasting, and not do not represernt all the people of our country. Get rid of whatever the rules are that punish a state for changing the date. What insanity!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  214. Truthful OH

    Michigan and Florida should particpate only after the nominee has been chosen. Those state officials knew they were breaking the rules and did it anyway for there own selfish reasons and now they want to bend the rules, again for selfish reasons.

    If they wanted their voices to be heard the people should have spoken up and told the state officials to obey the party rules. That is when they should have spoken up, not in the middle of a hotly contested race.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  215. Len

    No. If there was an agreement by all the candidates, including Clinton, that should be respected.

    But Hillary being who she is now wants to change the rules in the middle of the game. Typical.

    This lady has no regard for ethics at all. And is that what we want?


    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  216. julia

    Absolutely, they should be left out. They knew the rules, and they should be held to that agreement. Hillary only wants to change the rules now, because it helps her. Does the country really want someone like her leading us? She does not have any experience for Day One. Why won't someone call her on it? Can you just picture Bill and Hill fighting over the phone when it rings at 3 in the morning.

    Woodbridge, VA

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  217. gladwyn

    Best solution is to divide delegates equally....Florida and Michigan voters will be represented....and no candidate gets any advantage.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  218. saftgek

    Jack – NO DO-OVERS!

    Michigan & Florida Democratic officials were well-aware of the negative consequences of their decision-making. Current circumstances should in no way change the status of Michigan & Florida.

    If we play a game, we are to follow the rules. If we violate the rules, we should be held accountable. Michigan & Florida Democratic officials made informed decisions. Now they should be held accountable.

    It's really very simple.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  219. Bob, Portland OR

    Absolutely NOT. All candidates were told that Michigan and Florida were not going to count, and only Hillary thought she was above the process. If Florida and Michigan want to count, they can do a DO-OVER vote. But the votes cast in the primaries that they both moved against the DNC's wishes should absolutely not count.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  220. Noah

    C'mon, Jack. Everyone know that most Florida votes don't count anyway. If they did, George W. would never have been elected President.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  221. waye britton

    The democratic party prides itself – as well it should – on being the party of inclusion. There in lies the problem. The issue to be compromised on has nothing to do with michigan/Florida or there delegates (actually it does but....) it has to do with the policy of inclusion. The party must find a way to compromise between inclusiveness and not excluding (thereby losing elections) by its arbitrary policies. Hillary and Barak are going to ego us (with the help of jac**ss Nader) into 4 years of Bush light (McCain)

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  222. States' Rights

    The RNC was smarter about it - penalize but not all delegates. Now the DNC has a problem. The solution? That's up to the residents of Michigana and Florida respecively.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  223. Greg - WA

    I believe rather strongly that the delegates should not be seated. In my mind, a big part of the reason the rules were put in place was to try to discourage states from constantly moving their election/caucus forward (in an attempt to influene those that follow). If these delegates are seated, there is little incentive for states to follow the rules in the future. Very likely, even more states would move their primary/caucus up, resulting in primaries and caucuses being held in 2011 for the 2012 Presidential election. And you thought the election season was long already!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  224. Jude - Saratoga Springs, NY

    Counting the votes in Michigan and Florida now puts Hillary ahead in the popular vote. Given how convoluted the math is on the Democratic side in the apportionment of delegates, it seems to me that the popular vote ought to be the standard bearer in determining the nominee, and as any Democrat who lived through 2000 could tell you, every vote should be counted.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  225. Brett - Michigan

    Count them!
    the DNC's rule is a horrible and stupid rule that disenfranchises voters–voters that the DNC should want to keep happy (or maybe that just makes too much sense?)

    I understand the rules were made in advance but that doesn't make them good rules. Besides, we should all be concerned that the democratic process might fall victim to DNC and RNC party "rules", and that would be a real tragedy.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  226. Carol

    Michigan & Florida knew the rules and they chose to break them anyway. Now they want to be rewarded for breaking them. I say pay the penalty for their actions & not be seated. Hildebeast wants the votes because she won there. If Obama had competed the outcome would have been different. She's scared & grasping at straws.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  227. Berta Bermudez

    Florida and Michigan should be allowed to seat their delegates. The people in these states should not be denied their voice.
    Hillary Clinton is the best qualified candidate for president and she has received an enourmous amount of bad press for being Hillary and being a woman. It is time she is treated with the respect she deserves. If another woman with Obama's credentials were running for president, she would have been discredited months ago. That this campaign is not a gender issue you say. I say it is, and I'm aghast and at a loss that someone with an impeccable resume of years of service is being discounted in favor of a speaker who is not even that original in his rhetoric (all those pauses and effort to find the right word when a speech has not been memorized). Pay attention to those Clinton supporters (25% when last polled) who say they will vote for the republican nominee if Obama is the democratic nominee. The democratic party needs to support Hillary because she is the best qualified to be in the White House. Count the votes in Florida and Michigan, big states that supported her because they were not dissuaded by showmanship. I am among those 25% of Clinton's supporters who will not vote for Obama if he is the nominee. I will not vote republican, but I will simply not vote or write in the name and vote for the only really qualified individual in the democratic race: Hillary Clinton. (University professor, way, way under 65, from Union, New Jersey).

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  228. Steve Dansker

    Count 'em as is. What? You want a level playing field? You want Clinton to play fair? You must be joking! Remember the Billary creed: win any way you can. I'm all for it. Of course, did I say I have no morals? Doesn't matter: skulduggery is my motto.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  229. Chris

    I think that the delegates should not be seated as is. It would be unfair to Sen. Obama if the delegates are seated, because he played by the rules the Democratic Party put in place. His name wasn't on the ballot in one of the states and the other he wasn't allowed to campaign and voice his ideas and goals. If Sen. Clinton truly wants these delegates seated she should agree to a re-vote in both states. However, that has its drawbacks as well, namely, no time for campaigning in either state. If this happens, it will be a farce as Sen. Clinton has the name recognition as well as her "victories" in those states already. The easiest and most sensible thing they can do is not seat the delegates. This way, the contest cannot be called unfair.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  230. Nicole in New York

    If the DNC does not want to risk losing support for their candidate in the states of Florida and Michigan, they should really let them have an opinion in the nomination.

    The general election is going to be a tough contest and Florida is going to a critical state for the dems to win. They should fight like a Republican for as much support as they can get if they hope to take back the white house.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  231. al

    The delegates should be seated. Everybody deserves their vote to count. All the names were on the ballot in Florida. In Michigan any of the candidates could have been on the ballot but only Hillary Clinton put her name there, it's not her fault the others didn't.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  232. Brandon

    I am embarrassed enough as a democrat. The party is having enough issues with looking torn and fraught with infighting. Florida and Michigan must sleep in the bed they have made. They may feel like they aren't being represented but they showed how much they were willing to play by the rules early on when they went against the party's rules.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  233. Noelle

    I live in Florida and voted in the primary, but I know many people who did not because they believed it would not count – it would be unfair to let Florida and Michigan seat their delegates at the convention and a redo would also be unfair. The States should be punished for moving up their primaries thinking they would have more importance when in fact they would have been in the limelight if they stayed put!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  234. Brian (in PA)

    The powers that be in the DNC made a mistake voiding the say of party members in MI and FL, to protect the pride of those in IA, NH, and SC. Now they have a mess on their hands.

    Of course voters in FL and MI should have a chance to be heard! Either take the totals already cast, or have another election and bill it to the DNC. Maybe it can resolve what appears to be a stalemate.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  235. Kristin

    All of this bickering is only going to cause voters in Florida and Michigan to become disenfranchised. Like some who commented before me, I agree that the people of Florida and Michigan did not make the decision to move up the primaries so why punish them? The people in Florida knew at the time their votes would not "count" yet they still showed up in record numbers to cast their ballots. I understand that some people believe that the rules are the rules however, what side are you on? Are you on the side where it is more advantageous to not have the votes counted? I say, slap the state with a fine and have a revote. A revote may cost money, but I say if we didn't we would be far worse off.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  236. Michael DeLeon

    Should there be any question ... Their delegates should be able to vote. These States are a part of the United States of American. Call me crazy but this is a country of Democracy.... They should be able to vote. They are Americans .... SHOULD I SAY MORE ....

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  237. April in texas

    Rules are rules and should be followed. It would be a mistake to redo the votes after rules were not followed. There is no easy solution but then this is politics.

    Austin Texas

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  238. Dan

    Allowing the nomination to come down to superdelegates or uncontested elections would be a disaster for the Democratic Party. There are seven weeks until Pennsylvania– why can't Michigan and Florida hold legitimate primaries between now and then?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  239. Hope

    I think both states should have another contest. The people of both states should be allow to have their voice heard in our 2008 primary process.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  240. Jen from MI

    Our votes should definitely count. Why did we even go out and vote if it wasnt going to mean anything?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  241. Jim

    Why should the Democratic National Committee be permitted to get away with what so many us have been fighting against the past seven years - subversion and dismissal of the Constitution of the United States of America? Everyone's vote should count. The Constitution gives us the right to vote. Common sense says that those votes should be counted.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  242. Brad - New Orleans

    Abe Lincoln had it right when he said that even a bad law should be followed to its letter until it is lawfully changed. We are a land of laws – the votes shouldn't count. Michigan's and Florida's parties challenged the rules unlawfully and lost. It is their fault and the people that support their parties should think twice the next time they are to open their wallets for them.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  243. Max


    As a Liberal Progressive Floridian Democrat I refuse to have my vote count. Why? Because if we can't expect our two candidates to stick to their own accords than how on Earth can we expect them to keep their word on the issues that effect millions of us every day.

    Let's cut the bull, this is about honor and the lack their of from Hillary supporters to circumvent this election. It's called math and it's simple, she lost.

    Max, Palm City Florida

    March 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  244. Bob in Pinellas Park, FL

    Citizens of these United States have no say in what a different State decides on when to vote – I would not want to dictate to Wyoming when they could or could not vote.

    I wish our State and Federal elected officals would worry more about getting things accomplished and protecting our borders, citizens and members around the world than petty politics.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  245. Greg in Texas

    Florida & Michigan both knew what the consequences were for moving their primaries to an earlier date. They walked into this with their eyes wide open and now they're screaming about being treated unfairly. As for Hillary Clinton – she's putting on this 'holier than thou " magnanimous attitude about everyone's vote should count. . Does anyone really think she would be speaking up if it weren't for the fact that she stands to gain if their elections are recognized? Didn't ALL the candidates agree to abide by the national party's decision? As she's shown with all her negative campaigning, she's the kind of person who feels the end justifies the means. Give me a break. This is all just another case of no one wanting to take responsibility for their own decisions.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  246. Dave (Mueller), Tallhassee

    Someway, both States should vote again. I understand there was a formal agreement that no candidates would promote themselves in those respective primaries. Hillary is well known politically in Florida and in Michigan. Obama is a newcomer. The present results wouldn't be fair to Obama. He wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. However, Hillary would still win those States, especially Florida. By the way, we had a great Democratic party turn out even though it meant nothing.

    Dave, Tallahassee

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  247. Barry - WA

    New primaries should be held in both Michigan and Florida and the votes/delegates counted accordingly. Silencing the voices of the primary voters in these states can only harm the Democrats in the general election come November.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  248. Ted - Charlotte, NC

    The votes already cast don't count. Those were the rules the party laid down. Can you imagine the ruckus if the difference ended up being delegates chosen outside of the process, thereby disenfranchising a black man from running for the highest office of the land?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  249. Bukky, Baltimore

    No. They new the rule, and the consequences. The candidates AGREED. Now you want to go back and re-write the past. No it doesnt happen like that. The reason we have consequences is to teach a lesson.

    Obama was not even on the ticket in Michigan and Did not actively campaign in either states. The party is being Bamboozeled by Hillary's Machine

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  250. Melissa

    I am a Michigan resident and I think it is unfair that Michigans votes and Florida's votes are not going to be counted. I also think that it is crappy that they are talking about a re vote. Half of the people probably won't come out again because people usually don't vote for the primaries to begin with. So I think they need to figure out a way to count the votes that were already casted and leave it at that. If it was the other way around and Obama won Michigan and Florida they would have counted it and not even second guessed it. I feel like the media and people in genereal are one sided. Everyone is so quick to judge Hillary but Barack can do no wrong and that angers me!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  251. Damian

    If America is a democracy, then NO Florida & Michigan should not be silenced. How can the U.S. set itself up as a beacan of demorcacy to the world if millions of it's electorate get ignored?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  252. Tel, Arlington, VA

    I think the Republicans had a better solution – halve the number of delegates each state receives. The Florida results should stand, since all names were on the ballot. If Michigan wants to be counted at all, it should have a new vote.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  253. Mark Persinger, Seattle, WA

    The decision should stand as it is and not be changed at this point.
    To reverse a prior decision on the matter would be unfair, as candidates would have to be able to go back and campaign in those states again and re-run ad campaigns, etc, which is no longer possible.

    It is sad that MI and FL were trying to debunk the system by moving their primaries up in order to have more influence on the candidate selection. If the Dem party allows their votes to count now, every state in the country will move their primaries up next time, and the whole system will not function properly.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  254. Michael

    This is classic Clintonian sliminess. It's beyond me how Hillary could honestly believe she's entitled to votes from contests her opponent did not participate in. I came into this race as a Hillary supporter and life-long Democrat. These shamelessly underhanded win-at-all costs tactics are exactly why I'm now donating to Obama, and would vote for McCain over Hillary if she wins this primary. If she can't beat Obama, then she should step aside; changing the rules in the middle of the game ruins democracy for all of us.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  255. Meredith- NC

    I wonder if Hillary would want the delegates to count from Michigan and Florida if she had lost? It is not fair to count them as they are because Obama wasn't even on the ballot on one state.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  256. Dwayne

    The game starts; the rules change; and now everyone wants a say? When does the "special prosecutor" get involved? Maybe the Supreme Court? Things that make you go hmmmmmmm.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  257. Floridian

    I think it's unfair for Florida and Michigan voters to have no say in the process. Our states may have broken the rules, but we didn't make the decision. We want to be heard. This is such a close contest to exclude Michigan and Florida voters. It also makes voters in those states feel like they are being excluded from the process. It's especially disheartening for a first-time voter. I would be happy with a re-do in the two states. That way, the candidates will have an equal chance and the voters can have a say. Punish the leaders, not the innocent voters.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  258. Joy, Florida

    I'm a Floridian and I had no say in moving up the primary, so why am I being punished? The state legislature decided to move it up, I didn't vote on it, no one asked me. Now my vote doesn't count. Punish the people who decided on this, not the citizens!! Why can't the Democratic Party lay some punishment out for the rulemakers and leave me out of it. Taking away my right to have a say in who wins the nomination is absolutely ridiculous. And we wonder why people say we can always count on government and politicians to screw you over.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  259. Daniel Blankenheim

    Florida and Michigan had their chance to follow the rules. They were given a 2nd chance.

    They tried callng the bluff of the Democratic National Committee. The DNC didn't budge.

    The crocodile tears of those 2 states are largely a plot by pro-Hillary Clinton people. Fairness is not what they had in mind.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  260. Rick in Fort Lauderdale

    Seat the delegates from both states. Do not allow them to vote in the presidential balloting.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  261. R Paul

    Michigan and Florida knew the rules. They wanted to show how important their states were by moving their primaries ahead of where they'd traditionally been,

    Hillary agreed that the rules are the rules. (She seems to have forgotten that.)

    Obama didn't even campaign in Michigan. Is this the Clinton's idea of a fair and square win? There are the Hillary rules and the real rules apparently.

    Sad result, but keep these votes OUT of the count.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  262. Dana

    You can't count Michigan!!! No one but Hillary was on the ballot!! Give me a break!!!

    When she was the front runner we heard nothing about these states! When it became a real race for the nomination, she now wants the delegates.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  263. james

    If those Delegates are seated, the democrats will lose the general election, period. Hillary knows that. This is why she hinted at a dram ticket today. Also, i respect Obama trying to stay above the fray, but as yesterday's election proves, negativity moves voters. Obama is not stupid. He will take off the gloves. If Hillary Clinton is man enough to through a punch, she better be man enough to take a punch.

    The battle of Hillary is over. The battle of Obama has begun. By losing in almost a dozen consecutive primaries and caucuses, Hillary had shifted the spotlight to Obama in the late days of the Texas and Ohio campaigns. The question of his readiness and experience loomed ever larger in the minds of the media and of voters. Her Red Phone ad, citing her supposedly superior readiness to be commander in chief, evidently cut deeply among the electorate.

    It’s time that Obama counters her strategy by hitting back.

    His lofty politics of hope will avail him little in the aggressive rough and tumble world of modern politics. He’s got to spell out the special interest connections that stigmatize Hillary as the tool of the lobbyists. He must underscore the need for her to release her tax returns for 2007 and 2006 to show the source of her newfound wealth.

    He’s got to probe her relationship with Norman Hsu and Bill’s financial ties to the emir of Dubai. He has to underscore how Hillary’s so-called experience, particularly in military affairs is largely derivative of her husband’s. He’s got to learn to trade blows with the Clintons, the best counter-punchers in the business

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  264. Fran Abington, PA

    I believe the voters should not be punished for the foolishness of the democratic leadership in these two states and that their votes should count. I think the primaries in MI and FL should be redone. Both candidates should have the opportunity to campaign, again, in both states, and let the people decide the Democatic party's nominee. I think it is the only way to keep this party united. I fear a sense of disenfranchisement will keep half the democratic voters away in November, if this nomination is decided by a handful of delegates with political ties.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  265. Bob in Michigan

    The Florida primary was at least a fair contest with all the candidates on the ballot. Those results can easily be reinstated and the delegates awarded as in any other state contest. I would have no problem with that.

    Michigan is a very different story. Obama and Edwards, in accordance with the DNC request, removed their names from the ballot. Clinton did not. As a result, the only major candidate choice the Michigan Democratics had was Hillary Clinton. Naturally, in a one horse race, she finished first, although the vote for "uncommitted" gave her a real run for the money. To give Senator Clinton those delegates would only reward her for disregarding DNC rules which her compaign initially supported.

    No matter what happens, 40% of the electorate (the "uncommited" total) who wanted to vote for Obama or Edwards were disenfrancised. Many more Obama and Edwards supporters stayed home rather than vote for Clinton or for uncommited delegates (what ever that means). The bottom line is that the Michigan ballots were totally meaningless and should not be counted for anything but starting a fire.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  266. Robin

    Jack, Hillary should bow out gracefully before it comes to making such decision on Michigan (where Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot) and Florida, where none of the candidates campaigned, so she basically won both on name recognition only. Opening up those states again would cause a big split in the democratic party. Let's face it. Barack Obama is the candidate for the 21st century. The Clintons had their time in the White House. Another Clinton administration would open old wounds and the airing of their dirty laundry once again – same old politics as usual.. yugh!.... There are many not so nice things that aren't being addressed about the Clintons. Right now a big question still remains in the eyes of voters 'Why doesn't Hillary Clinton want Americans to see her Tax Returns? Everytime she is approached on this subject, she manages to dodge the subject and divert attention on to something else. Very politically clever, but very suspicious indeed, especially if you look at their past record when Bill Clinton was President and how he handled that very same question in 1992. Obama for President.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  267. Michael in Washington, DC

    This is classic Clintonian sliminess. It’s beyond me how Hillary could honestly believe she’s entitled to votes from contests her opponent did not participate in. I came into this race as a Hillary supporter and life-long Democrat. These shamelessly underhanded win-at-all costs tactics are exactly why I’m now donating to Obama, and would vote for McCain over Hillary if she wins this primary. If she can’t beat Obama, then she should step aside; changing the rules in the middle of the game ruins democracy for all of us.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  268. Karen

    I think that they should stick by thier decision and not count the delegates but they should also reduce how much is needed to win.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  269. Tom

    Neither the voters nor candidates should be penalized because the state legislatures got over ambitious and wanted to get their states toward the front of the line and have their contests early. How could these hacks know the chairs of DNC and RNC would effectively issue a death sentence as punishment? Cooler heads need to prevail. Count them . . . somehow. Because after all, shouldn't the point be that all votes count?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  270. karen

    Flordia and Michigan should not count. If the citizens are concerned about their votes not being counted, they should hold whoever decided to violate the rules responsible and get them out of their sytems for the next election. Including Hillary, who broke the rules by putting her name on the ballot in Michigan. Why is it that these people who violated the regulations of the DNC feel so entitled that they shouldn't have to play by the same regulations as everyone else? And as for Hillary, who is perpetrating this myth that everyone else has to follow the regulations except her, well that tells me EVERYTHING I need to know about her integrity as a human being.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  271. thagoodsport, Sun City Arizona

    This is a set up from the Republican Party to win the general election. What are you people thinking! Under the Constitution I believe everyone's vote is counted! Howard Dean had better get his head out of the ground...if that is where it is...and start figuring out HOW they are going to count ALL the votes this time! If it comes down to the US SUPREME COURT again, I'm pretty sure we know how they vote.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  272. Derrick from Michigan

    I for one would like the state of Michigan to redo the democratic primary. As a voter in the state I came upon the decision to either vote Clinton or not to commit, this decision was disappointing to me seeing as how I couldn't even vote for the potential next President, Obama. I feel as though I didn't get a fair shot to elect our next presidential hopeful Barack Obama.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  273. Mita

    Rules are rules! All parties agreed to it and that is it!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  274. David Frazier

    FL yes MI no. You stated that Obama didn't campaign in FL well no one did. Matter fact Obama ran a TV spot for the SC primary that ended up being shown in FL. As for MI re-vote That is the only fair democratic thing to do Obama wasn't on the ballot . Oh I forgot we dont do the one person one vote thing in the United States anymore. The Supreme Court chooses are President.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  275. Hugh Palmer

    Michigan and Florida did this to themselves. They hoped the DNC would back down so they could play a more prominent role in the primaries. Well the DNC didn't back down. They followed the party rules for their primary.

    In respect of this decision many of the Democratic candidates did not even run in these states. I voted for Bill twice, but I find Hilary's approach to this as two faced and manipulative of the voters. Early on she appeared to defer to the DNC decision, now that she needs the delegates suddenly she is on a righteous path to have their votes counted.

    Florida and Michigan knew what they were risking, most of the candidates played by the rules. The results should stand uncounted and Clinton should be called out for the less than admirable approach she has taken.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  276. Stephen Page

    Florida and Michigan should have no role whatsoever in the Democratic primaries. The issue was resolved long ago and there is no ethical way to change it at this late date. It's unconscionable, yet totally predicable, that Hillary Clinton would pull such an underhanded trick as to try to have that decision overturned when she knows Obama didn't campaign in either state, based ENTIRELY on the fact that it was clearly stated many times that neither Florida or Michigan would count towards the delegate total.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  277. Robert H. Schwartz

    Well, this was one of the stupidest decisions that I ever saw! What was the point of denying two states citizens their votes in the first place? There had to be something in between that the Dems could have agreed upon rather than what they did, but at the end of the day, they did agree on denying these two states citizens their votes...and now I believe they are stuck with it. So much for the working men and women of this country that the Dems claim to want to help...no state needs more help than Michigan!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  278. Iain

    Why should the people of Florida and Michigan not be allowed to cast their vote? It was the parties within these states that went against the DNC, they should face consequences not the voters. Is this not the DEMOCRATIC primary election. What is less democratic than not letting the voices of voters be heard?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  279. Ron

    Funny how yesterday both Hillary and Bill Clinton blamed the Republican Governor of Florida for the delegates not being seated. If they arent smart enough to realize the DNC decided against seating the delegates, she shouldnt be running for President.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  280. Gary F

    I hope the Dems will play by the rules.....we can not seat Florida and Michigan.....it would play right into the Rep. hands.....see if the Democrats don't get their way they will just change the rules....that won't happen if I'm President. I'm John McCain and I approve of this message.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  281. Brian from MI

    Don't move your primary up. I'm warning you...

    Don't move your primary up. You'll lose delegates...

    You moved it up. Well since we need your delegates we'll just forget that little rule...

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  282. Debra

    These two states should hold new primaries if their results are to be counted. Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan, and he didn't campaign in Florida because the Democratic Party said they weren't going to count the results. Does Hillary seriously claim these states as victories? Can the party really be considering seating these delegates for her? Let's be fair now...

    Santa Crua, CA

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  283. Ann from Michigan

    I wanted to vote for Barak Obama in the Michigan primary, and was sorely disappointed when he wasn't on the ballot. I voted "undecided" as did many Michigan Democrats. Hillary Clinton's win in Michigan was not a true win because it wasn't a full ballot. It would be unfair to those of us who wanted a full ballot, and wanted a vote for Obama, to seat only delegates for Clinton. Either we need to be given the chance to vote again, with a full ballot, or I think our state should not send delegates. It's the only fair approach, in my book. Those who voted for Clinton will be given the chance to vote for her again, and those wanting to vote for Obama will be given the chance. Fair is fair.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  284. Rebecca Miller

    It was a mistake to eliminate Florida and Michigan from the the primaries to begin with but once the damage was done it would be a bigger mistake to change the rules in the middle of the game.

    The candidates knew the rules from the beginning it is not acceptable to change those rules in midstream to benefit one candidate or the other. That just does not seem fair. This change of heart should have come about before the primaries started to give every candidate a chance to campaign in Michigan and Florida.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  285. Franky

    I think this will get more interesting as the days or weeks go by. What's the difference is that Michigan or Florida want in fact a do over. To be honest, if both Michigan and Florida are fine with it, then I'm cool also. But I do suspect somehow or someway they want to get involve, the question will be, will they let them? I think more answers will be emerge as the days go by...but I'm actually cool with it.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:36 pm |
  286. Isaac Svirskis - Finland

    I am not sure about Michigan but I would leave Florida as it stands. I clealry remember interviews on CNN in which supporters from both sides gave their views for supporting their candidates. Both Hillary and Obama had support. Hillary never campaigned there and shouldnt be penalised for enthusiastic supporters of which it clealry seemed there were many. It would be different if she did campaign there knowing the rules but she clealry did not.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  287. Marney

    As a Obama supporter in Michigan, I was dismayed that his name was not on the ballot. Although we were given the opportunity to vote "undecided", in the off chance that our delegates were seated those "undecided" votes could potentially go to Obama. Even with no competition on the Michigan ballot, Hillary only won 55% of the votes, with 40% voting "undecided". Given that a very large percentage of Obama supporters didn't bother going to the polls, I think it is safe to say that had his name been on the ballot, he would have surely won Michigan. That being said, I don't believe in any way that Michigan delegates should be seated as they are now. I feel that we deserve a chance to vote again, with both Obama and Clinton on the ballot. Anything less is a slap in the face to Michigan voters. Since the voters weren't given the opportunity to make the decision to move the primary up, the voters should not be penalized by not having our voices hear in this historic election.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  288. AL Lyons

    Clinton is going to anything to steal the election from Obama. I don't think Americans want a person in the White House who can't win the elections fair and square. Who do the Clintons think they. Dictators rob elections.

    AL Lyons
    Hermiston, Oregon

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  289. John, Carson City, NV

    None whatsoever. These states knew the rules when they moved their primaries up, then knowingly and willfully chose to break them, knowing full well the consequence could be that their delegates aren't seated. We don't allow anyone else to choose to break the rules without suffering the consequences for their actions, so why should Florida and Michigan be immune from responsibility? Imagine if their precedent could be used as a defense in court - our jails would be completely empty!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  290. Andrew Thall

    If the state political parties are willing to foot the bill, Florida and Michigan should have another primary.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  291. Michael

    I was and am angry at the havoc that the primarily Republican, Florida State Legislature has wreaked on the Florida primary. However, I am bewildered that the DNC stood by and let it happen. At this point the DNC has placed itself in an absolute no win situation. No matter what happens someone will cry foul. In my mind there are only two possible choices: 1) the delegates should not be seated or 2) hold sanctioned primaries (but who will pay?)

    If, by some momentary lapse of reason or activist court intervention, the results of the faux primaries are upheld and delegates are awarded based on elections which were conducted as "beauty contests", I think that the democratic party will be making an absolutely monumental mistake that will effect it, and this Country, for years to come.

    Michael, Miami Beach, Florida

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  292. Russ Kent, WA

    They either don't count or they redo it.

    I wonder where Hillary would be if it weren't for early voting and all her super delegate friends that she has bought favor with.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  293. David

    It sounds like most people think that is fine to deny two states their right to vote. Can someone explain why that's OK? So far, nothing I have read, here or in the news, justifies depriving people of their constitutional right.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  294. Jason -RI

    As A Republican I am loving this race and all of this in fighting – While the Democrats are fighting this out till the very end and fighting over piontless votes in FL / Michigan – McCain is building his platform, bringing the party together, and generating cash for the general election –

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  295. charlene-chicago

    Why did everyone agree to the rules,and now certain people are only speaking up now, to try to change what they all agreed upon? Could it be the indifference and arrogance of a certain candiate who thought it would be over on super tuesday? The "inevitable" candidate now wants change the rules in the middle of the game!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  296. Gary Hamilton

    Of course they should be counted. To those saying no,,,,GROW UP....THIS IS AMERICA....Everyone has a vote!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  297. Hiram Drew

    Hillary Clinton is a divisive woman and I will never vote for her simply by watching how she's conducted herself. It shows to me and I'm sure many other americans of what she will do to get elected President. This is one person who will not be voting for her. I am competely turned off by the negative ads she's ran about Obama and very impressed with how Obama has conducted himself Presidentially. I support Obama and if he doesn't get the nomination, Hillary sure won't be getting my vote.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  298. Dan-NE

    We have 3 candidates running for the presidency; two are Democrats and each are roughly favored by 50% of the Democrats voting. The numbers of delegates both have are not significant for either–sure, it looks like Obama is winning, but I see a pretty strong argument of delegates and people who did not and may not vote for him. Same thing with Clinton–she may be close but there is still that 50% that prefers Obama. So what is going to happen–think about it–maybe the roughly 50% that didn't get their candidate in will decide to vote Republican or not vote at all–NOT GOOD! Maybe its time Obama and Clinton banded together–they would sweep the elections as one because that will satisfy more Democrats and demonstrate a strong unity-oh well... just a thought

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  299. Wendy

    I definitely think that a revote or a caucus is the only way to resolve the issue of Florida and Michigan. Clinton will still have an advantage there so she should agree to that resolution.
    Allowing essentially a new primary contest in which Obama and Clinton may compete that does not back down from the DNC original stance on the primaries that were conducted outside party rules...seems to be the only way.

    The two governors who now are issueing a joint statement are playing for votes of their own. The guy who stood by McCain's side, Gov. Christ, and is a partisan is obviously trying to win folks over within his state...for McCAIN if Obama is the nominee. He is a Republican and its not his business to interfere in the DNC or the Democratic convention.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  300. Tom

    It's clear that the DNC set up the rules, and Florida and Michigan elected to not abide them. It would be a travesty right now if these votes were counted; and since Hillary won them and has pushed to have those votes counted, she'd likely be the favored candidate in each state (even though she agreed to not campaign there, she still managed to give a victory speech.) Those votes don't count. A re-do would be flawed because of what has already occured. They should be thrown away, and the disenfranchised voters should be mad at there own state's Democratic party.

    When this goes to the Supreme Court, and the court decides to count the votes, it'll be a case of the judicial system dubiously overturning a Florida election result once again. Pathetic. American politics have grown pathetic and predictable.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  301. j fitzgerald

    The seating of FL Democrats would be unacceptable for two reasons: 1) Many voters elected to stay home in the primary because they knew their vote would be nullified by the DNC.

    2) The FL Democratic Party broke the rules, with full knowledge of the consequences.

    3) The candidates agreed to the rules.

    One reasonable alternative is to re-run the FL primary. Barring that, the Delegates have no right to be seated at this convention.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  302. DMitri NY

    This is getting ridiculous. Florida and Michigan violated party rules, both candidates agreed to shunning those states, now Hillary, due to political expedience because it NOW may benefit her, says they were wronged. Will Hillary stop at nothing? This reminds me of the Republicans in 2000, trying to do anything to ignore the popular vote. The popular vote supported Gore in 2000. It supports Obama in 2008. This time we should all listen to reason and stop trying to allow people to loop-hole in the wrong, least popular supported candidate. But because we are so divided, it would seem reasonable to have her as VP. United, the Democrats can bring back some semblance of sanity to the White House. BTW, I voted for Clinton, Gore, then Kerry.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  303. Scott Moyer

    As a Michigander myself, the national party is not denying any of us our voice. It was our own state leaders that took care of that. They were warned repeatedly by the national party not to move up our primary or consequences would be rendered yet without voter consent or approval, the state party elected to ignore those warnings. Though it pains me not to have a voice in this years election I place full blame on my state party leaders and officials and no one else. The DNC should stick to their original warnings otherwise rougue states will abound in future elections.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  304. Ellen

    Jay in Houston is on target in his comments. The rules were stated at the outset of the campaign. It would be entirely unfair to significantly change the rules once the game has begun. I know that if I lived in Florida or Michigan I would be completely pissed to be left out of this process. But being pissed doesn't mean the rules should change.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  305. marie elena saccoccio

    Michigan and Florida votes should stand and votes should be counted as they now exist. The DNC was simply ridiculous in trying to set rules governing the primary dates. That was the business of the individual state. Both candiates abided by the prohibition against campaigning in Florida. There is no need for a revote there. In Michigan, Obama CHOSE to remove his name from the ballot. He should now live with that choice.

    Neither candidate will garner enough delegates without Michigan and Florida. This is the best solution.

    By the way, I am absolutely against caucuses. They in no way are representative of the overall voters.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  306. Ralph Pace

    The entire situation is dumb. The National Party should not have the authority to tell the state when to hold a primary; likewise, the state needs to recognize that it has some obligations to the National Party. The long and the short of it is that new primaries in both states need to be conducted. Forcing these two states to forego representation is virtually another form of taxation without representation. A new primary – without the need for additional campaigning (God knows there's been enough of that in this day of instant communication)-is the only equitable solition.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  307. Art H

    I recall that during the Michigan primary, Barack Obama and John Edwards had specifically asked their supporters to vote 'uncommited', since their names were not on the ballot and Hillary Clinton's name was.

    So all the "uncommited" on the Michigan ballot belongs to Barack and Hillary's votes belong to her. The election should count.

    Florida was cut and dry in that all the candidates had their names on the official ballot. None of the candidates campaigned, except for the ads that Barack snuck into Florida through the package deal he bought. Bottomline, Florida should count without any changes.

    Anybody who advocates 'ignoring' the Florida or Michigan results, is conspiring to handover the whitehouse to the GOP.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
  308. Bart

    It is likely that a re-vote won't change anything. There will be a split amongst both states and it will not fix that problem. By the way, there is no constitutional right to vote in a primary, just the general election.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:40 pm |
  309. Ratgurl

    Jack, I'm confused. Is it only "special people" who get to have the rules changed if they don't like the outcome of the original set of rules? The penalty was made VERY CLEAR when Florida & Michigan decided to move their elections ahead of the pack. What was wrong with their originally scheduled elections in the first place? If they had kept the original dates, all of this would be a non-issue.

    They made their choices, they should live with the consequences.

    That said, I do have some sympathy for the actual VOTERS who had no say in the date of the elections. It's terrible that we won't give them a proper chance to be heard.

    Floridians & Michiganders – complain to your politicians!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:42 pm |
  310. Peter

    Retroactively allowing delegates from these states would be another shady victory for Hillary....so she can continue her obvious attempt at securing herself in the halls of history and continue her empty Democratic rhetoric.

    The Florida and Michigan' democratic parties broke the rules and the DNC saw fit to punish them both. Do we really need another President who is willing to bend rules (read laws) to suit her own selfish pursuits?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:42 pm |
  311. DJ in TX

    The Michigan and Florida state Democratic Parties knew the possible consequences of moving the date up. To seat the delegates would be totally unfair. Truthfully the DNC is between a rock and a hard place. If they seat the delegates as is (with no campaigning and only Hillary's name in Michigan), they'll disenfrachise a lot of people not in those states. Michigan voters will still be able to say their voice has not been heard. With only Hillary's name on the ballot and John Edwardds was still in the race, who's to know what the turnout would have been if all 3 names and campaigning would have taken place. In Florida, since they knew the delegates didn't cout, whose to say there would not have been even more voter turnout if all candidates would have bee allowed to campaign. Unfortunately there is no easy solution out of this one. The DNC (Michigan and Florida are not exempt either) screwed this up royally. As a result, whatever decision is made, there are going to be a lot of voters disenfranchised (as many including myself already are). I'm an Obama supporter, but I'm sick of the Democratic party as a whole. This was our year to get a Demcrat in office and the party is totally divided, this mess in Florida and Michigan, and the dumb way our party allots it delegates is....has already destroyed any hope of winning in November. I think I'm voting Republican no matter who wins. The party is broken.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:43 pm |
  312. Chuck -- KS

    Disenfranchisement of any voter is unacceptable, un-American and far too Republican. The Democratic Party made a mistake in taking away voters' rights in Michigan and Florida over a scheduling dispute. The Party must own up to its mistake, and do the right thing by allowing the voters' will to be represented by delegates at the Convention.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:44 pm |
  313. Abad

    Yes they should be seated. Nobody should ignore Florida or Michigan. Just to be fair, they should have a re-vote so both Obama & Hillary can campaign & there is level playing field. Nobody in these states will appreciate it , if they are unable to have their votes counted. Certainly not in the Democratic party that is always trying to make sure everybody gets a cahnce to vote. If these states do not get any delegates, the democratic party will never be able to claim that they want "every vote to count".

    March 5, 2008 at 4:44 pm |
  314. Sandy - CA

    Let the voice of people be heard....that's a true democracy. Regular people shouldn't be punished, because the party heads did not follow some rule.
    Florida had everyone's names on the ballot......so let the voting results count as is.
    Michigan – Clinton gets her share of folks who actually voted for her; Uncommitted can go to Obama.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:44 pm |
  315. Joe Lee's Summit MO

    Does this really surprise anyone that the Clintons/Democrats want to change the rules after the fact. We only need to go back to the 2000 election where after the fact the Democrats wanted to change the rules on how votes were counted. Florida had a set a rules in place for years. Gore didn't like those rules and went to court to try to make the punch cards be counted like they are in Texas. Oh and lets not forget about the butterfly ballot created by Democrats that had been used in prior elections with no complaints. They even tried making that an issue. Everyone knew the rules and should have to live by them. If you can't win the election out right, you shouldn't be allowed to change the rules until it gives you the result you want.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:46 pm |
  316. Valerie (democrat in Michigan)

    With the race as close as it has become, the democratic party can not afford to let Florida and Michigan voters not participate in this historic election.

    The first primaries can't count because they were not fair fights. If Florida and Michigan both have primaries or caucuses now they would no longer be breaking party rules. Then their delegates can be seated at the convention and everyone should be happy.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:50 pm |
  317. Alan-Michigan

    Leave us alone! The DNC was stupid enough to ignore the votes of democrats in two very important states and the black eye still won't go away. There are good proposals to fix the the primary schedule foolishness ( like the Anuzis-Dingell plan) that will hopefully solve future problems. The Republicans may be smart enough to seat and count all delegates from the two states because it will not make a difference to them and to make the democrats look even worse. You made your bed DNC and now deal with it, we do not want to come to your party anyway.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:50 pm |
  318. SuwaneeGeorgia

    It seems that once again the Democrats are disenfranchising voters. Democrats claim to be for the common man, but they are really elitists who stifle the will of the people at every turn.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:51 pm |
  319. Patrick McIntire

    That depends on whether you are an Obama supporter or Clinton supporter. Obviously if you are an Obama supporter you want to disenfranchise these millions of voters and say they somehow broke the rules by committing the heinous crime of voting. If you are a Clinton supporter you want the votes to count because they seemed to vote for her. It is amazing how self righteous and indignant the Obama voters get when the voters favor a different candidate. Such hypocrites.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:51 pm |
  320. CJ

    I think the votes should count or they should have a redo. This is America after all and everyone's votes should count.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:52 pm |
  321. k

    Yet another example of how Democrats cannot figure out how to vote. Remember election 2000 anyone?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:52 pm |
  322. Bryan - Mt. Pleasant, MI

    I live in Michigan and I want my vote counted but Clinton was the only viable candidate on the ballot and there was no campaigning done in the state.

    It would not be fair to count the votes as they are without a real election process and without a real campaign process.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:53 pm |
  323. Alan

    Who is standing in the way of counting the votes and why? The people have spoken and it's time for Obama and the DNC to get out of the way. None of the candiates campaigned in the states. Nobody forced candidates to include or exclude their names from the ballots. Obama was sucking up to Iowa and New Hampshire by removing his name, and he reaped the benefits in Iowa. Since when do we let one candidate say that he doesn't like the outcome and give him a re-do? How about best 2 out of 3?

    – Alan in Florida

    March 5, 2008 at 4:53 pm |
  324. Sam, Grand Prairie, TX


    Rules are Rules! This has gone on long enough the total delegates at the end of the rule abiding states should determine the nominee. Whichever nominee who has the most delegates, should win the Nomination, end of story. Superdelegates should endorse that candidate openly and push the candidate over the top and maybe save the party. Its about to ugly Jack!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 4:53 pm |
  325. Jennie Cantrell

    Count the votes as they stand. Everyone knew who was running and are fully capable of making a decision. Obama's supporters wrote in his name in Michigan. It is scarily obvious Obama will do anything to win including successfully bullying the press. Where is the coverage of his autobiography that has been proven full of false stories? Where is the coverage of his undying support for the Kenyan leader currently slaughtering his countrymen? Where is the coverage of his rise to power backed by sixties terrorists that admit to planting bombs and killing innocent Americans?

    March 5, 2008 at 4:56 pm |
  326. J in San Diego

    It is undemocratic to exclude the voters in Michigan and Florida from the primaries, something the Democratic party should be especially sensitive to. However, the only democratic way to include the voters in those two states is to run the primary in those states again, that way Obama has a chance to be voted on and Obama supporters in those states have a chance to vote for him. If he loses big in those states, than Hillary gets the delegates fair and square.

    If a re-run is not possible, than the delegates from these states should not be seated and democrats in those states only have their local leadership to blame.

    The Clinton campaign's drive to include the delegates from these two states without the rerun is evidence that the Clinton's represent a morally defunct brand of politics that is all about getting power no matter what you have to do. Just the type of politics she accuses the Bush adminsitration of.

    Another example: her message and style have changed several times during the campaign, last night she even started to mimic Obama's style of speech ("Yes we will"). What does this lady really stand for?

    I think the writing is on the wall about the drivers for Hillary, up until last night the most featured words in her speeches were "I" and "me". Obama speaks about "we" and I do believe we all need to work together to bring this country back from the brink of disaster.

    March 5, 2008 at 4:59 pm |
  327. Rob, San Francisco

    To allow these votes in would be equivalent to telling MLB teams in August that their preseason games from March are now going to count against their record.

    It was no secret what the punishment was going to be prior the elections in Michigan and Florida. What the DNC should have done was remove those delegates out of the total needed to secure the nomination. The required number of votes right now still factors in these delegates that will not cast a vote.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:04 pm |
  328. jeff

    Yes, the voter's of Michigan and Florida should have our (I'm a Floridian) voices heard!! And as for a re-vote, I think in Michigan that would be fine, but why is that necessary in Florida where all candidates were on the ballot? Florida's vote should count AS IS!! We all knew who the candidates were when we placed our votes or we wouldn't have voted. In this day of TV, internet, etc, the candidates don't have to come and speak in our states for us to know who they are! I thoroughly educated myself on these candidates before I placed my vote for Hillary. Thank you!


    March 5, 2008 at 5:04 pm |
  329. Victoria Kane

    If we are to trust our Democratic Party, Florida's delegates must be seated!!! It is not acceptable that Florida's votes won't be counted in the democratic process of electing a candidate and ultimately our President. We were wronged in the 2004 election were some votes were counted and thousands were not (Thanks to Bush cronies directing that fraud of an election in Florida) with the infamous chads falling from the votes. Our voice was not heard then and IT MUST BE HEARD NOW – LOUD AND CLEAR!!! A re-vote is not necessary and an insult to Florida voters. We have alredy done our civic duty to elect our candidate of preference. A re-vote in Florida would wrong again our voters. Rules were created to be ammended. Look at our Constitution!! Democrat Leaders should ammend their rules to make sure Florida voters are not being chastised for early elections (It is not the voters fault the election was early). The Democrat Leaders MUST make the right the decision to rescind the penalty to Florida and seat our delegates!
    If this is a truly a democratic process ALL delegates of all states MUST be seated!!!
    Democracy is built on trust....Don't dissapoint Florida voters......




    be seated!!!!!!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 5:10 pm |
  330. dfd45ma

    I have been watching this election process since 2004 , never really stops anymore, so the idea that someone voted for their choice too soon for this or that party is pretty much a joke. I used to vote but now I just watch how the money flows and try to hold on to my remaining assets while the banks get tax/regulatory bailouts and the gerrymandering keeps it from becoming too obvious even for solid Republicans/Democrats to ignore.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:10 pm |
  331. Brooks P

    I cannot support allowing the delegations to be seated "as is". The DNC's invalidation ruling came in response to the state organizations setting early primaries in violation of national party rules. The invalidation ruling came BEFORE the primary elections and therefore likely influenced the decisions of potential voters to participate (or not); and that's without mentioning the absence of candidates campaigning in these states.

    It's unreasonable for the state governents to bear the cost of "do over" primaries, so unless the Democratic party wants to underwrite the cost, such elections should not be held. If the delegations from these two states remain unseated, the delegates required for nomination should be reduced to 50% plus one of the total seated delegations.

    It's galling that Sen. Clinton's campaign claims to be entitled to the delegates elected from these states and that the state organizations believe they deserve some relief. For a party that complained about voting "rules" in Ohio in 2004 and Florida in 2000, it rings pretty hollow when they cannot follow their own clear rules and accept the resulting penalties.

    Brooks Peters
    Sterling, VA

    March 5, 2008 at 5:25 pm |
  332. John

    The Democratic Party made clear its rules and needs to stand its ground. We don't need a standard-bearer who would undercut the party to obtain the position.

    If Hillary Clinton would undermine her party to become its nominee, she would undermine her country to become its President.

    Knoxville, Tennessee

    March 5, 2008 at 5:25 pm |
  333. Marianne

    Absolutely count Florida and Michigan. They are Americans , aren't they? I would be very pissed if my state were not counted. I'm from Arkansas.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:27 pm |
  334. Jeff in McAllen TX

    Of course they should be seated stupid! Laws and rules never apply to the Democrat Party, only intentions matter...

    March 5, 2008 at 5:27 pm |
  335. Judge Whopner , TV Land , Arizona

    No Votes for Michigan or Florida they both broke the LAW... the Democratic National Commitee did the right thing...

    Judge Whopner , TV Land , Arizona

    March 5, 2008 at 5:32 pm |
  336. Lillian

    Of course Florida should count. Why is the DNC punishing the voters in Florida due to the fact the Republican governor and majority controlled Republican legislature changed the election date. Both Obama and Hillary were on the ballot and Obama spent millions on TV ads that ran in Florida, although you never hear them say this.
    Let the Florida votes count!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 5:32 pm |
  337. Kim - Huntsville, Alabama

    Jack I'm tired of this mess. They knew what they were doing from the start. Cheating! The votes should not count as is and anybody with any amount of common sense knows that. After Mississippi there is nothing to do for the next six weeks so set a new date for the re-vote say, March 25th or April 1st for both states then move on to Pennsylvania. There is no other way to settle this. The DNC should stick to their word but I know they're not going to and Hillary is not going to let it go until she has her way even if this means using every dirty trick in her book and tearing up the party in the process. I'd rather do that than give the Republicans the next four years in office.

    Obama 08!

    March 5, 2008 at 5:42 pm |
  338. Mike Adams

    Florida and Michigan knew the Democratic policy on the timing of primary elections. They chose to ignore these rules and are now paying the consequences. Even though I am an avid Hillary Clinton supporter, it's ridiculous that these states think they should have their delegates seated. That said, Obama's claim that he didn't campaign in Florida and wasn't on the ballot in Michigan doesn't mean much. If his supporters are so motivated and believe so strongly, it wouldn't have been too difficult for them to WRITE IN Obama's name. Talk about a lack of motivation. In Florida, both Obama and Edwards told their supporters to vote "undecided" if they didn't support Clinton–but she still won with over 50% of the vote. Furthermore, if Obama not being on the Michigan ballot means Clinton loses her bragging rights, certainly Clinton not being on the Wyoming ballot should cost Obama bragging rights in that state. The fact of the matter is Obama's Kennedy-knock-off campaign–without the specific plans of JFK–has major issues with the notion of "judge not, lest ye be judged." Perhaps Obama supported should stop supporting their golden calf and consider supporting a candidate with specific, detailed, thought out plans for America.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:44 pm |
  339. J.L.

    Dumb move in the first place by the DNC to strip all of the delagates. The RNC got it right by penalizing half of the delagates. The Dems will unfortunately pay the price for igoring these voters unless they find a way to redo the vote so that is is fair to BOTH canidates, not just self-serving Hillary and allocate half their normal amount of delagates so that both canidates have adequate time to campaign and give these states the attention they want and deserve.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:51 pm |
  340. Greg

    No, those states broke the rules and they deserve to be silence....you can't have selective enforcement of established rules or you will have states jumping around all over the place. Besides Obama was not even on a ballot in Michigan.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  341. Jay in PA

    The rules were set and should be abided by. The time to alter the rules was before the voting took place. If a re-vote were to occur, the DNC should pay for it. If this country could ever go to regional primaries rotating every 4 years this mess could be avoided in the future.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  342. Bill / Wolcott. CT

    Florida and MIchigan must be counted for the problem that is about to occur is unbelieveable in American Politics. You telling me the Democratic National Committee has the right to tell 5 plus million voters their votes don't count? Who the hell are these Democratic National Committee Members? Maybe we should consider making the Democratic National Committee members targets in the next election also. The U.S. Government is base don freedom of speech, and is a country set up on the basis of by the people for the people government, not communist or anothe rthing. So the Democratic National Committee has the right to tell 5 million plus voters they don't count?You can't even get a nominee unless you count Florida and MIchigan thats number 1, but number two, don't you think Jack, that the American people are going to be watching and as soon as the super delegates choose the nominee, there will be screams of a set -up or fix in this election? Count Florida, count MIchigan and while your at it give Hillary Clinton credit for leaving her name on the ballots in those states and being smart enough to know that sooner or later they have to be counted!

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  343. Casey

    If the Dem Party allows Michigan and Florida, it will only send a message to other states. Next election season, everyone will hold their primary/caucus in November 2011; because they know that if their votes don't get counted at first, they eventually will.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  344. Anne Bunai

    The number one right in this country is to vote and have that vote counted. No one should be able to deny any group a vote...that is a slippery slope that we do not want to go down. What were they thinking when they made such a fundamentally unsound threat to the states?

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  345. Allen Shinners

    I believe that neither state should be seated. Both states were warned that they wouldn't be seated before they actually had their primaries. They chose to ignore the warnings, so they should pay the price. The other issue is that since both states were told that their primaries wouldn't count, Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan and didn't campaign in Florida because of the DNC's decision. If they allow the delegates to be seated, it would totally be completely unfair to Obama. Of course Hillary Clinton wants the two states seated, It benefits her directly.

    Lancaster, Ohio

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  346. Thomas from Salt Lake City

    You don't get do-overs in elections. Florida and Michigan decided to move up their primaries, and were told delegates wouldn't be seated as a result. Its a stupid rule, but that's the way it worked. Campaign strategies were based on the delegates from those states not being counted. To change the rules months later would be a serious mistake with heavy altercations, including the potential of a legal battle.

    Voters knew their votes weren't going to count when they went to the polls. Why should we all of a sudden change the rules this late in the election? Their voices will be heard when the general election rolls around.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  347. Khal

    Houston, Texas...mmmm, This is classic american politics, I wonder what tactic the Clintons will think of next, is this just a way to "steal' their way back to the White House..? Change the rules in the middle of the game, say it not fair to the one behind..mmm,then do a lot of arm twisting in the back rooms....(like George Bush's ele-c-tions....mmmm, be careful there will a lot of dead bodies around the Clintons....V.Foster, R. Brown et. al God Bless America and pass the ammunition...Bill, and Chelsea...we will run next....Presidential Family for Life!.....Wake Rip Van America!!!!

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  348. Mark

    Why is this still being debated? EVERYONE knew the rules a years ago, Michigan and Florida broke the rules should not be seated. I don't think anyone has a problem with a redo as long as it doesn't cost the taxpayers a fortune. The ONLY way to fix this is to have another vote.

    How could Hillary say she won Michigan and Florida? I bet I could win Michigan and Florida if I was the only one on the ballet. Besides, if I remember correctly, didn't "Other" get 45% of the vote?

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  349. cindy

    absolutely, who are a few hacks to suppress the votes of 2 states? Everyone's vote should count.
    Last week everyone was calling for "super delegates" elected officials vote what ever their constituents voted.....well with that thinking Kerry & Kennedy have to vote ffor Clinton, since she won the state!
    This whole way of voting is just sleazy & convoluded, including the electoral college. There is no good argument that we shouldn't have the popular vote determine elections.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  350. Jerry


    Florida or Michigan won't even matter even if America votes
    in the hundred of millions. The popular vote won't even count when just 538 Electoral Voters pick the next President .
    Anyone remember the year 2000?
    Had enough Americans?

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  351. Conor

    The delegates from the early contests should not be seated. This would be a clear violation of pre-determined rules which the candidates agreed to abide by when they decided to run. If the DNC gives in to Clinton's argument, then it will have no authority in the next election cycle. The Democratic state organizations in Florida and Michigan knew what they were risking when they decided to hold their primaries early. They are the ones to blame.

    Clinton's argument to seat the delegates is based not on the injustice of the DNC's decision to punish Florida and Michigan, but rather on the fact that she won two states virtually unopposed. In Michigan, she won 55% when Obama and Edwards were not on the ballot. 40% of voters there still turned out to vote "uncommitted" instead of Clinton. In Florida, the candidates lived up to their promises not to campaign there, a move that favored the front-runner at the time, Clinton. I don't see a way for these delegates to be seated as a matter of "fairness" because that would penalize candidates who played by the rules.

    A fair way to resolve this dispute might be to hold new contests in both Michigan and Florida; the problem is that there is very little time to do so and that the DNC would likely have to hold caucuses, which would not be advantageous to Clinton.

    It clearly is a mess, but I think it is too late to change it now. I'd expect Howard Dean to oppose the move publicly very soon.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  352. David Rorvik

    The perfect solution for the delegate deadlock is to have new primaries in both Michigan and Florida. It would cost about $12-15 million to conduct these primaries in each state. The candidates themselves could raise that much in a week. The people in both states deserve to have their voices heard. If either candidate opposes this solution it exposes his (or her) weakness and lack of commitment to real democracy.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  353. Ron

    Florida and Michigan knowingly removed themselves from the process. I'd be upset with my party officials if I lived in either of those states, but they're out of luck for the nominating process. If the delegates from Michigan and Florida are seated and participate in the nomination, Ralph Nader just got my vote.

    March 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm |
  354. Robert Kornhauser

    First of all, it is audacious of both Florida and Michigan to assume that they can defy their party's rules and still get a seat at the table. But it is equally audacious of Sen. Clinton to believe that she is entitled to delegates from those states based on an invalid primary. It is this type of pompous arrogance and total disregard for rules that the American citizens need to evict from Washington. After all, didn't we have enough of this during the 2000 election?

    March 5, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  355. Bryan

    Why should there be a revote? Voters in these states already had their opportunity to vote. If some candidates didn't value these voters enough the first time around to have their name on the ballot or ask for their vote, why should they have a second chance? How can the voters be expected to believe their interest now? Count the vote and delegates from Florida and Michigan as they stand currently.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  356. Kathy K.

    Florida and Michigan should have to re-vote. Period. They were told that if they held their primaries too early, their delegates would be penalized. They held their primaries anyway and now want to change the rules. Had they followed the rules, they would have gotten what they wanted, a major role in the nomination process. They broke the rules and must pay the price–the cost of another election. We are not a banana republic–yet.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  357. Jake - Wimberley, TX

    While it was refreshing to see such a large Democratic turnout in Florida and Michigan, it's not like the decision to not seat those states’ delegates was made AFTER the primaries – that occurred months in advance of the primaries. So what do they have to cry foul about?

    The voters showed a commitment to the democratic process, which should be lauded, but the DNC is not comprised of voters but political and community leaders (unfortunately) who must represent their constituents respectfully and responsibly. They obviously failed in that.

    Rest assured that whoever the Democratic nominee is will campaign both states thoroughly to “re-enfranchise” the voters.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  358. Eric, NJ

    I imagine that some of the Florida and Michigan Democratic primary voters, some of those whose candidate didn't get the nomination at least, may choose to vote for McCain in the general election if only out of protest. As long as the DNC really isn't concerned about those 44 electoral college votes (out of 270 needed), then they should stick to their guns!

    Considering that in 2004 Michigan went for Kerry by only 165,437 votes (3.5%) and the 2000 Florida results went to the Supreme Court, McCain could use all the help he can get.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  359. Adam C. Kenosha, Wisconsin

    I think the folks in those states need their voices to be heard and count, but they had their chance once already... Tough luck I say.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  360. Evan Erxleben

    As a Florida resident and a Hillary Clinton supporter, I want the delegates in Florida and Michigan to count. As a realistic person, I think the best compromise would be a re-vote in both states with both candidates on the ballots. Sure it would cost money, but one of the most important parts of a democracy is people's voices being heard. Right now, the people of Michigan and Florida are being silenced and that is not what this country should stand for. I think it is worth a few million dollars to preserve the face of our democracy.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  361. Steve


    We as a country can't ignore 2 states. It would be best to split the states evenly which in turn would put both candidates closer to their goal. It would be a waste of our hard earned money to have a "do over" and all the legal wrangling that would go along with a "do over"
    p.s. I'm not voting for either candidate.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  362. Robert Reed

    Rules are rules. Michigan and Florida should not count. Are we forgetting what McCain and his gang will say if we let Florida and Michigan count? They'll say "If the democrats can't follow their own rules, how can they lead the country." And they'll be right.

    Robert Reed
    Lincoln, NE

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  363. Dianne

    Absolutely not! If the DNC does not wake up, I soon will be filing a law suit to ensure that my vote that I cast for Hillary in Michigan counts. Hopefully Florida follows as well.

    Has anyone investigated the Obama camp for their activities last night in Ohio to have certain polls stay open 2 hours longer without merit?

    Will the media ever really investigate Obama????

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  364. Kevin McIntosh

    I'm from Michigan and yes our votes like Florida should count as is. Why did Clinton make the ballot here and not Obama? She obvioulsy made the time to get her name on. Why didn't he? Don't punish Hillary Clinton for Barack Obama's ineptitude. He had his chance. No crying now.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  365. Michael G

    Florida and Michigan are also states in this union and their voice deserves to be heard just like the other forty-eight states. Obama and Clinton's fate should be in the hands of the American people. All of them, not most of them.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  366. rodney

    Michigan and Florida should re-vote and it should be paid for by the state parties since they madethe decision to move the primaries forward against the rules.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  367. Jon


    What's wrong with a 50/50 split of the delegates. Hillary would conceivably do better in Florida, while Obama would do better in Michigan. There would be no cost to the tax payers and the people of these two states would be represented.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  368. Wendy W

    Even Clinton campaign manager Terry McAuliffe said on a different news program this afternoon "the rules are the rules" when talking about the super delegates. I'm so glad to know the Clinton camp gets to pick and choose which rules they want to live by.

    Michigan and Florida should not be seated. Period. End of story.

    I for one do not want a candidate that knew the rules going into the campaign and has decided to attempt to change the rules in the middle of the game. It's an issue of CHARACTER!

    March 5, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  369. eric

    jack florida and michigan,s should deligate should be split even and send to the convention what a shame mrs clinton dirty tricks you will never learn..eric

    March 5, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  370. Nich Anderson

    Oh Florida – always in the political news.
    Yes, their voices should be heard somehow –
    it's just not right to silence all those voices ever
    but of course what those voices have to say
    is especially interesting in this tight race.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  371. Michael

    Both national parties warned Florida and Michigan what would happen if they moved their primaries up, and yet the state legislatures still voted to do so. Now, the states want to complain that it's not fair. If it's not fair, then they shouldn't have voted for it, and redoing the election or adding the delegates now that only one candidate ran doesn't make it fair.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  372. Eric Taylor from Michigan

    I am a registered Michigan voter, and I want my state to my represented in the Democratic and Republican Conventions as much as any other Michigan citizen. However, what I do not want to give my pledged delegates to someone who obviously broke Democratic Party rules by keeping her name on the ballot. The Democratic Candidates agreed to not campaign or even keep their names on our ballot, but alas, Hillary was the only major candidate to keep her name there, and on top of that, didn't she rally in Florida on the day of their primary? So is it really fair to just give delegates who obviously cheated? Well, if Michigan and Florida play a truly critical role in the DNC, I am willing to give up my tax dollars for a fair and honest redo of the primary or a caucus (I prefer the caucus personally). But if Howard Dean loves cheaters, then go ahead and just give the delegates to Clinton.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  373. Kelly

    First, I am reading everyone complain that Clinton is behind this. Of course she would like it to stand, she won. If it were Obama, he would be fighting the same fight. Stop trying to lay blame and let's fix the problem so the people in those states get a fair say. Solutions, remember!

    Secondly, I am reading how this is like punishing a child and letting the child out of the punishment. Let us not forget that it was a Republican Governor who moved up the date so lets punish all the democrats. Realize that ones getting punished are the ones who voted not the ones who moved up the date. I think Florida's votes should stand since all the names were on the ballot and Obama was the only one who campaigned there by running ads. Michigan should have a redo with both names on the ballot. I understand it is a costly process so why doesn't the DNC do an online fundraiser to help the good people of Michigan do this new vote?

    March 5, 2008 at 6:20 pm |
  374. Jason - Medina, Ohio

    None really. This is about a political parties primary. Political parties can make-up whatever rules they wish to nominate an individual for President. Michigan and Florida didn't play by the rules that were set (go figure!) and should be left out. What would it say about the process to change the rules before it was all over? Obama and Clinton should stick to the issues at hand, Clinton should stop complaining, and look ahead to the remaining states who have not voted. Besides, Lincoln won the general election for President and he wasn't even on the ballot in five states.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:21 pm |
  375. James Fogle, Lakewood OH

    The voters in Florida and Michigan should not be punished for a decision about the primary date that was beyond their control. However, a revote will cost the DNC a great deal of money that could be put to better use in the General Election. I can understand not counting the first Michigan vote, since Obama took his name off the ballot (even though it was his decision to do so). I don't, however, understand why the vote in Florida should not be counted EXACTLY AS IT STANDS. Voters had equal choice to vote for Clinton, Obama, or Edwards. The fact that Obama chose to ignore the voters in Florida is his problem. If your campaign is about "bringing everyone together" it seems peculiar to leave out the people of our nation's 4th most populated state; delegates or no delates! A revote in Michigan would still cost the DNC a considerable amount of money, but is the only fair thing to do for the voters in Michigan. It would be a great shame to deny millions of voters in Florida and Michigan the chance to cast their vote. Whatever the outcome of the election, it is awesome to see democrats get passionate about voting again! Will we be able to keep this passion alive (and ultimately beat the republicans in November) by ignoring all these people?

    March 5, 2008 at 6:41 pm |
  376. Kate

    Hey wait a minute... if Hillary gets her way she will be just like George Bush. Remember Florida eight years ago, Gore would be our president now and maybe we would all be in better shape if things had been fair.

    So will Florida once again decide our nation's fate? If so I definitely think that none of their delegates should count look what a mess they stuck us with before.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:41 pm |
  377. Tim

    They changed the rules, and they are being punished for it, as they should.

    Those states removed themselves from the process. If you live i that state, maybe you should direct your anger to the people that made the decision to remove you from the delegate process.

    If they want to re-vote and do it properly, only then should the be allowed back into the process.

    And yes, you do get do overs. sometime a re-vote is the only way to deal with the situation. 2000 is one example where there should ahve been a re-vote instead of going outside the process to get your way.

    March 5, 2008 at 6:41 pm |