Can someone explain to me why Clinton supporters are upset over MI and FL?

[MBrown]

I don't understand the fine details of it especially MI.

 

[Dman877]

Because those states have lots of delegates and since Obama removed his name from the ballot, Hillary cleaned up...

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Dman877
Because those states have lots of delegates and since Obama removed his name from the ballot, Hillary cleaned up...

^^^^^ Perils of the internets, OP. This poster doesn't even have his basic facts straight.

 

[nageov3t]

I don't think it's fair to characterize the typical clinton voter as "upset" over the compromise... it's certainly better than not having any of the delegates seated, but they would have preferred a 100% seating of both and some have gone so far as to say that Obama shouldn't have gotten any MI delegates since he was given the "uncommitted" voters, who could have been meaning to vote for anyone. but those are the breaks. even a decision that broke for 100% of the clintonistas demand wouldn't have stopped Obama's slouching towards the finish line.

 

[jpeyton]

They need something to complain about, since they can't admit Hillary lost the nomination contest fair and square.

 

[Lemon law]

Because Michigan did not count, Obama did not put his name on the ballot but Hillary's name was placed on the ballot. So Hillary won Michigan by a 100% default. In Florida which was also not supposed, both Hillary and Obama were on the ballot but Hillary won more votes. And the ndemocratic party has been searching for a compromise way to include Florida and Michigan ever since.

And when that compromise committee met last Saturday, Hillary needed a compromise extremely favorable to her side. And Hillary and friends quickly found the committee was willing to let her get part of her way, but was not as totally Hillary favorable as Hillary wanted. And the compromise finally reached was Hillary favorable, but not favorable enough to make Hillary competitive in the delegates counts. And in fact, those Obama supporters on the compromise committee were more than willing to give Hillary more than she deserved, but they basically bent but did not break.

And naturally Hillary is upset, because when she got the committee decision, her nomination chances went down the toilet. And there is no appeal, the decision is basically the final end for Hillary.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: MBrown
I don't understand the fine details of it especially MI.

I'll take a stab at it.

MI didn't have Obama or Edwards on the ballot.

(Not sure about teh precise numbers, but should serve as an illustration of the principals under contention). Hillary got about 55% of the MI vote, the other ballot choice was "uncommitted". Let's say it got about 45% (IIRC Dodd and some other minor candidates were on the ballot and totaled about 5% I've just added them to the uncommitted total to make 100%).

I believe the Hillary camp wanted her to get credit for 55% of the vote, probably about 55% of the pledged delegates. I also think they wanted the remainder, or 45%, to be seated at the convention as uncommitted - i.e. not for Obama.

I think the HRC camp also wanted 100% of MI seated, and each one to have a full vote.

This would have given her a substantial increase in pledged delegates putting her much closer to Obama.

INSTEAD

MI was split fairly evenly between HRC & Obama, and the pledged delegates all get seated but only have 1/2 vote. This is basically what the MI Dem party wanted, and to some extent they based the delgate split vote on recent polls in MI.

In other words, HRC picked up very little in terms of delegates vs. Obama.

The real reason they are upset? Their shenanigans didn't work; they lost the vote at the DNC Rules Committee and the chance to continue the race. So, the legendary Clinton political machine took a huge blow to it's aura and stature.

And of course, it's all because she's a womean and the Dem party is sexist and unfair to her.

Fern

 

[WHAMPOM]

I have a plan, give Hillary the MI cast votes and Obama the remainder of the MI registered Dem voters as his share. What was the turn out 40%?

 

[RY62]

I don't think most Clinton supporters are upset. I think there are just a few very vocal Clinton supporters that are upset over the ruling. All in all, I think it was a pretty fair way to settle the issue.

 

[GoingUp]

Because they're completely irrational.

 

[MBrown]

Also How does she say she has the popular vote? Is she not counting caucuses and small states.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: MBrown
Also How does she say she has the popular vote? Is she not counting caucuses and small states.

several caucus states didn't report their popular vote numbers, but based on estimated numbers including all states, she's got a slight lead in the popular vote.

 

[sportage]

Because Michigan did not count, Obama did not put his name on the ballot but Hillary's name was placed on the ballot.

WRONG!

BOTH were on the ballot, NOT put there.
THEN, Obama "CHOSE" to REMOVE his name.

Soooo, Hillary got votes, Obama did not.
But... Those that cast a vote for "OTHER" (Maybe Obama, maybe Edwards,
maybe Pee Wee Herman???) Those "other" votes were 1/3 rd what Hillary got.
2/3 Hillary votes, 1/3 "other" votes. Got it so far???

Sooo... THEN... They added "other" votes to "Hillary" votes, split them by 50/50
and gave Obama 50% and Hillary 50%.

THUS, taking away 1/3 rd of "ACTUAL VOTER CAST" Hillary votes and
spliting that 1/3 50/50, then "GIVING" those votes to Obama.

And you THOUGHT Republican's in 2000 were N A S T Y people!!!

A whole lot of bad blood going on here due to this. Obama pulled off miracles
to pull ahead of Hillary. But that?s NOTHING to the miracles he will need to
pull off to get back those Hillary women voters.

My mother is one of those Hillary women voters, and she IS PISSED!!!!!
And already says she WILL NOT vote AT ALL in November.

Its not those mad voters might vote for McCain, its that those mad voters WILL NOT vote AT ALL!!!

 

[ElFenix]

as i understand it, michigan was split evenly between obama and hillary. the guy from michigan wanted a slight tilt in hillary's favor to 'accurately reflect voter sentiment' and hillary wanted a big tilt in her favor. considering that many midwestern states had been leaning in hillary's favor, a 50/50 split is an obama win.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Because they are bitter, irrational, and do not understand the concept of rules, or the dangerous precedent that would be set in accepting the original results in either state.

 

[Fern]

Sorry, but sooo much mis-information here.

Originally posted by: sportage

Because Michigan did not count, Obama did not put his name on the ballot but Hillary's name was placed on the ballot.

WRONG!

BOTH were on the ballot, NOT put there.
THEN, Obama "CHOSE" to REMOVE his name.

Yes, Hil, Obama and Edwards were all on the ballot before the "Four State Pledge" came up.

To get on a ballot you have to pay a fee and otherwise qualify (get enough signatures on a petition or be a national candidate etc).

All serious candidates start that process early. So they were all the ballot, then the 4 state pledge issue came after the states (MI & FL, and others threatened to, like my state NC) moved up their primary date.

I've linked the pledge here in P&N before. The pledge says you will not PARTICIPATE or campaign in those states. Obama and Edwards complied with the pledge and removed their names - so as not to *participate* - while Hillary left her's on. There have been lightly reported complaints by Dems that Hillary cheated by leaving her name on the ballot, and the MSM continues to ignore the "cheating" issue by only reporting the 4 state pledge as requiring no campaigning in those states and completely ignoring the "no participation* part of the pledge.

However, IMO, the Dem party bosses both in the DNC and MI are aware of this *cheating* stunt and I think it weighed in on their MI delegate decision.


Soooo, Hillary got votes, Obama did not.
But... Those that cast a vote for "OTHER" (Maybe Obama, maybe Edwards,
maybe Pee Wee Herman???) Those "other" votes were 1/3 rd what Hillary got.
2/3 Hillary votes, 1/3 "other" votes. Got it so far???

Nope - bad math. Hillary got 55% of the MI vote, about 40% were for "uncomitted" and the remaining 5% split among Kucinich and Dodd etc.

So, the other votes were not 1/3 (33%) of what Hillary got, they were over 4/5 (+80%).


Sooo... THEN... They added "other" votes to "Hillary" votes, split them by 50/50
and gave Obama 50% and Hillary 50%.

THUS, taking away 1/3 rd of "ACTUAL VOTER CAST" Hillary votes and
spliting that 1/3 50/50, then "GIVING" those votes to Obama.

Nope, that's not right either. They didn't take votes away from Hillary, they didn't split it 50:50. What they did was give Obama the 45% that didn't vote for Hillary. I'm pretty sure they got Edwards etc approval, but he's endorsed Obama anyway and encouraged his pledged delegates to switch support to Obama at the convention.

From news reports:

By a 19-8 vote, a compromise allocating Michigan's pledged delegates by a 69-59 forumla -- but counting each by just half a vote -- has just passed the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee.

The compromise will give Clinton 34.5 delegates and Obama 29.5 delegates. It would also seat all of Michigan's superdelegates but also give them just half a vote. Moreover, it would make the magic number to clinch the Democratic nomination 2,118.

Link

AND

The Michigan compromise, details of which must still be worked out, would give the majority of delegates to Clinton, who won 55 percent of the vote in the state's primary. Those with knowledge of the RBC's inner workings say the potential deal involves all of the candidates who took their names off the state's ballot voluntarily agreeing that the now-uncommitted delegates would go to Obama. The Illinois Democrat, accordingly, would receive 40 percent of delegates. Clinton nets roughly nine delegates on Obama under this scenario

LINK


And you THOUGHT Republican's in 2000 were N A S T Y people!!!

A whole lot of bad blood going on here due to this. Obama pulled off miracles
to pull ahead of Hillary. But that?s NOTHING to the miracles he will need to
pull off to get back those Hillary women voters.

My mother is one of those Hillary women voters, and she IS PISSED!!!!!
And already says she WILL NOT vote AT ALL in November.

Its not those mad voters might vote for McCain, its that those mad voters WILL NOT vote AT ALL!!!

See bolded, and yes, it appears women are pissed off.

Might put more women in play as VP candidates for both parties.

Fern

 

[Cuda1447]

I don't know. I'm not a fan of either. I do think it is unfair that Obama gets any delegates from a state that had no one actually vote for him in. If he is not on the ballot how can he receive any of the votes/delegates? Doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[Moonbeam]

Bush and Obama are election steelers.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Bush and Obama are election steelers.

Pittsburgh must be pissed

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
I don't know. I'm not a fan of either. I do think it is unfair that Obama gets any delegates from a state that had no one actually vote for him in. If he is not on the ballot how can he receive any of the votes/delegates? Doesn't make much sense to me.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You still do not get the clue, in a nutshell, that democratic compromise committee was a basic test of Hillary strength among democratic super delegates and the democratic leadership. HILLARY HAD TO WOW THEM ALL TO GET THE NOMINATION, and instead all she got was a lousy t-shirt saying close but no cigar as she drew that monopoly community chest card of, congratulations, you won second place in a beauty contest.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
I don't know. I'm not a fan of either. I do think it is unfair that Obama gets any delegates from a state that had no one actually vote for him in. If he is not on the ballot how can he receive any of the votes/delegates? Doesn't make much sense to me.

It also seems unfair for Hillary or anyone to receive any delegates from Michigan since the primary was a sham. Many people who might have voted in a legitimate primary stayed home since they believed that their votes wouldn't matter. Neither candidate campaigned in Michigan and then Edwards and Obama relied on the DNC's decision that the Michigan primary would not count, so why should they be punished for relying on the rules?

I'm all for seating all of Michigan's and Florida's delegates but they shouldn't have any votes; let them cast their votes with a weight of zero. It's disheartening to see that so many Democrats have no concept of rules and fairness and of the distinction between an honest primary election and one that's a sham.

Also, I suspect that this notion that Michigan and Florida voters are going to be PO'd if their delegates aren't seated is BS. If they're angry it's primarily because the local news media is telling them that they should and will be angry.

 

[boomerang]

If the delegates are pissed off, it's because they're going to miss out on one hell of a party where someone else is picking up the entire tab.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
I don't know. I'm not a fan of either. I do think it is unfair that Obama gets any delegates from a state that had no one actually vote for him in. If he is not on the ballot how can he receive any of the votes/delegates? Doesn't make much sense to me.

He followed the rules, kept his word, and took his name off the ballot. You're saying Hillary should have been rewarded for lying?


This is voter suppression. Voters were told their votes wouldn't count, so many of them stayed home, or voted for Hillary to show their support, or Huckabee to sabotage the Reps. Now all of a sudden they do count.

 

[Throckmorton]

Hillary and her supporters' insistence that we count a primary in which her name was the only major one on the ballot is Medvedevesque.

 

[palehorse]

it's simple... rules, consequences, and fairness don't mean anything to Hillary OR her supporters.