Howard Dean says do over or dont count to Fl and Mi

It's fair, and they should do it. Of course, I'd love to see caucuses instead of primary votes, but either way. Hillary will gain a little ground, but not enough, and it will give her challenge for superdelegates even less weight.

Matter of fact, if I'm Obama, I come out as publicly as I can right now supporting re-do's in each state. It's gonna happen anyway, and he may as well win some favor in those states by being vocal about it now....
 
so you think just counting them as is would be better for Obama?

This is the only fair way to do it. Obama gains more votes where ever he campaigns. He did not campaign in FL or Mi.
 
"so you think just counting them as is would be better for Obama?"

No way; if they counted as is, there would be a revolution. The Democratic party would cease to exist.
 
obama would take Michigan and Hillary Florida. ether way the net change may be up to 30 delegate swing.. not enough.
 
Cypress said:
the thing that worries me, is that I think Clinton could win in FL and MI in a do over vote.
Click to expand...

I think it could be tight. Michigan has more of an "Obama" kind of layout. FL has clear advantages for Clinton, but she got 50% to Obama's 33 & Edwards 15, when they weren't even campaigning. She'd probably still win FL, but I don't think she would net too many delegates in the process.

It would end up benefitting Obama; if they don't re-run the states, one of Clinton's big rallying cries to the Supers will be "I won MI & FL, too"....
 
Onceler said:
I think it could be tight. Michigan has more of an "Obama" kind of layout. FL has clear advantages for Clinton, but she got 50% to Obama's 33 & Edwards 15, when they weren't even campaigning. She'd probably still win FL, but I don't think she would net too many delegates in the process.

It would end up benefitting Obama; if they don't re-run the states, one of Clinton's big rallying cries to the Supers will be "I won MI & FL, too"....
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Okay, maybe I'm wrong. I was thinking Michigan, demographically, is kind of like Ohio. Where Clinton crushed. It has a base of working class, union voters and older voters and reagan democrats that seem to be her base.
 
A lot of MI's population is also urban/young. It would be close there.

Hillary got 55%...when her name was the only one on the ballot. I don't think she'd get the kind of double-digit victories in either state that she'd need.
 
hillary wont want it if she doesn't think it will benefit her. so clearly she thinks it will benefit her. You know any talk of it only being right that everyones voice is herd is basically a consolation to her main motive and expendable if shes thinking its not going to benefit her.

oh how nice it will be to have yet another president that loves america so..
 
The rules were clearly laid out BEFORE the primary season began. Everyone, and every campaign agreed that if Florida and Michigan held their primaries when they did they would not be counted toward the total. Now Hillary wants to reneg on her part of that agreement and wants the totals AS they exist counted. This is pure BS. However, after reading this thread I have less problem with redos because there are only two candidates left. Edwards is out so even if Clinton wins Florida my bet is it will be close and they will split the delegates. What we will have a very mininal net if any at all. So I agree, Obama needs to agree right now, let the states get rolling. The National Dem party can help finance the redos and the results will stand. It won't be what Hillary wants and if Obama jumps on the redo bandwagon he looks like he wants Michigan and Florida votes to count.
 
Why should the Dem party pay for what the Republican party in FL decided to do?

It was the republicans in control in Fl who made the decision when to hold the vote.
 
Desh said:
Why should the Dem party pay for what the Republican party in FL decided to do?

It was the republicans in control in Fl who made the decision when to hold the vote.
Click to expand...


I hear caucuses are cheap. The DNC should tell Hillary okay, we'll re-do these since you want 'em so bad, but we have to do caucuses, because we don't have the cash.

They'll explode.
 
no; it's not fair. they broke the rules, so they should accept the consequesces of their actions. not surprizing the dems don't care aboiut this
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top