There’s a difference between thin sources and thin reasoning. And you’re the one trying to prove his absolutist position here, not me.
But this discussion is clearly going nowhere. So I’m gonna let it go. Have a good one.
Your concession, grudging as it obviously is, is accepted.
You’d be surprised (or perhaps not) where they’re mounting a new Hope Offensive:
Oh, I don’t think that. I just hope ABC doesn’t either. Thought that was an odd way to word what they said.
Here’s a comment from that exchange:
The whole nation knows this except Clinton and her supporters who find themselves in a growing minority. If they seat those FL and MI dels, it’s back room snark, and more than a few people won’t stand for it. Aside from all that, it’ll be a moot point soon.
Is there a reason to think that fewer Clinton supporters than Obama or Edwards supporters stayed home because *their * votes weren’t going to count either?
To be honest, I don’t know the answer to that. I don’t know the demographic that actually showed up to vote - maybe there is a good excuse. But why did so many show up to vote knowing full well it wasn’t going to count?
I’m sure voters of all candidates stayed home. The point is that you can’t tell people their votes don’t count, then say afterwards, “Oh, they DID count! Oh, did you not vote? Too bad!”
If the voters are to be represented, they have to know when and where to vote. I think most people would agree with that. I think having a “fake” election that really counts is little different from having a secret election. Most people didn’t know when and where to vote, in the sense that they knew they were really getting to vote.
Now, FTR, I think the DNC messed up by not letting Michigan and Florida participate. The states messed up by moving their elections up even though they knew the consequences. The voters got shafted. But to decided LATER that the way they can be represented is to have the elementary-school-style “let’s see what happens, just for fun” vote count as a real vote is lame. To pretend it isn’t lame is also lame. Either speak up before the vote, if you’re worried about the voters, or STFU after.
You mean when the REPUBLICAN dominated Legislature and the REPUBLICAN Governor got together and passed/signed a bill into law that mandated when Florida’s primary would be held? All this in spite of the objection of the Democratic National Committee? Is that the mistake that somehow the Democratic Party of Florida made?
I can say that in Michigan, Hillary’s name was the only major candidate on the ballot so her supporters would’ve had less reason to stay home.
As I’ve told you before, Obama and Edwards supporters in Michigan were told to vote “undecided.” Funny thing is that the delegates awarded to undecided, should they be counted at the convention, are free to vote for whomever they choose including Hillary Clinton. Essentially your vote for Not Clinton could still be counted as a vote for Clinton.
Betcher bottom a fair amount of Obama and Edwards supporters stayed home, and likely in numbers far greater than Clinton supporters.
ETA: Zakalwe, in Michigan democrats Carl Levin and Jennifer Granholm were just as much of a party to moving the primary forward as the republicans. It seems stupidity crosses party lines.
The Washington Post is running a story implying that the Clinton campaign (if not Clinton) is preparing for what’s probably inevitable:
It goes on to say that there’s been discussion among her staff about Clinton shifting course and perhaps looking to take the Senate majority leader post.
I think the Senate is actually a much better fit for her and I don’t mean that in a condescending way. It seems clear to me that her talents are very strong as a legislator. Hillary is a discusser, a consenus builder, an organizer, a deal maker and a policy wonk. The kind of person who’s good at getting a bunch of people together to hammer out a deal over lunch. But (bless her heart), she’s just not an executive. I think she could have a much more effective career in the rotunda than in the White House. Plus she’s needed in the Senate. There is nobody better suited to carry the legislative ball on UHC than Hillary.
I hope she comes to appreciate her own talents as a Senator, stops viewing it as a step to the White House and really settles in to become a long term force there. Senate Majority Leader is definitely something she could get and be good at.
There are other items on a ballot than President.
As has been linked before, they were then asked by the DNC to work with them on an alternate plan and they refused. Several times. That mistake.
But besides that this was NOT the Florida Democrats being dragged into this against their will.
Well, what do you know? That’s sure not how they pitched it around here last year. Ignorance fought. Thanks!
Edited to add: After reading the full column in your link: The man has the facts straight, but I disagree with many of his reasons and conclusions.
I don’t think it was well known that the vote wasn’t going to count. The basic gist from news sources was that they wouldn’t dare to disenfranchise an entire state worth of voters from the primary process, just to keep the sacred status of Iowa and New Hampshire secure. I remember hearing a lot about DNC “Threatening not to seat”
That’s if you even heard about it beforehand. I know many that had no idea until they went to vote.
I knew about it beforehand. Everyone I knew knew about it as well. There was a fair amount of coverage starting well before the Michigan primaries were even held. If people honestly thought that the DNC wouldn’t dare, then it’s their own fault.
My brother in FL knew full well votes weren’t going to count - ergo he didn’t vote. He didn’t care what else was on the ballot in Ft. Lauderdale.
This whole mess about HRC trying seat the delegates is silly at this point.
There could also have been a belief that it *would * be made to count, eventually. Or that the symbolic value of voting would have influence of some kind elsewhere, or in the legislature that screwed the pooch for them this time. Or the innate sense of responsibility that citizens of a democracy have to vote for the candidates of their choice, regardless of the mechanism.
She’s suggested a compromise where they count half the delegates – just as long as it’s the half that voted for her, and not the other half that voted for Obama and Edwards.