Clinton Campaign Statement On RBC

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/clinton_campaign_statement_on.php


Clinton Campaign Statement On RBC

31 May 2008 07:40 pm


Harold Ickes and Tina Flournoy made the following statement this evening:



Today’s results are a victory for the people of Florida who will have a voice in selecting our Party’s nominee and will see its delegates seated at our party’s convention. The decision by the Rules and Bylaws Committee honors the votes that were cast by the people of Florida and allocates the delegates accordingly.

We strongly object to the Committee’s decision to undercut its own rules in seating Michigan’s delegates without reflecting the votes of the people of Michigan.

The Committee awarded to Senator Obama not only the delegates won by Uncommitted, but four of the delegates won by Senator Clinton. This decision violates the bedrock principles of our democracy and our Party.

We reserve the right to challenge this decision before the Credentials Committee and appeal for a fair allocation of Michigan’s delegates that actually reflect the votes as they were cast.

:grr:

She has pictured herself in the Oval Office for so long, she feels she owns it. Time to hang it up, Hillary. We have better things to do.

:headbang:
rocknation

:eyes:

I don't understand how they could fail to award any 'uncomitted' votes to the candidates other than obama who had also withdrawn their names or, to put it otherwise, on what logical basis did they do what they did?

Not trying to flame here, just to understand.

Thanks.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/31/1091053.aspx

Michigan compromise passes
Posted: Saturday, May 31, 2008 7:10 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008, Michigan

From NBC's Mark Murray and Ben Weltman
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.
more...

**********************************
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/31/1091448.aspx

Obama had the votes for 50-50 MI split
Posted: Saturday, May 31, 2008 8:01 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008, Obama, Michigan

From NBC's Chuck Todd
Per multiple sources inside the closed Rules and Bylaws Committee lunch, Obama actually had the votes to get a 50-50 delegate split out of Michigan -- but by just a vote or two.

However, it was decided to go with the 69-59 split to win a larger majority. That measure passed 19-8.

*** UPDATE *** Also, according to those with knowledge of the Michigan agreement, it is fair to claim Clinton the winner of Michigan. But they caution against counting her popular vote in the state.

DUH????

The fact is that there was NO ELECTION in Michigan. There was a referendum on Clinton. Obama agreed not to participate in the Michigan non-primary so he took his name off the ballot. Hillary broke the rules by leaving her name ON the ballot. She participated. All those votes were null and void. Everyone who cast their votes knew they were null and void. There WAS NO VALID VOTE.

Realistically, the 50-50 split should have been passed to reflect the fact that there WAS NO PRIMARY CONTEST!!!!

Clinton should be happy with her windfall. She'll argue with ANY rule that does not HAND HER then nomination.

NO ONE said ANYTHING about ANYONE removing his/her name from ballot; there were no 'rules' to break, in that respect.

Proposing your name for candidacy is participation.

'they weren't supposed to participate?'

the DNC, the rules and ways committee. Every candidate agreed not to participate in the michigan and fla elections. Everyone in the party agreed that those votes could not be counted, because they were not legally valid elections, because the rules were broken by changing the dates.
HIllary put her nmae on the ballot anway, after sdhe pledged not to participate, and after she said :Those votes will not be counted". Now she wants them to be counted because she is losing.

It's called "cheating" , as Donna Brazille said: When you change the rules of the game in the middle and at the end of the game, it is called cheating.

it may be wrong, or other bad things; CHEATING, its not. Cheatingt is 'to deprive of something valuable by the use of deceit or fraud,' according to webster.

But donna's got her another moment in the sun, I guess.

much more detail and eloquence if it makes you happier.

no one can change the meaning of words. CHEATING is NOT what happened.

Its one of our huge problems that words are used so carelessly these days. This way, anything can be called anything else, and anyone can be called anyone or anything. And this is why our finest candidates are so dissed and ignored; I'm referring to such as Wesley Clark and Joe Biden.

Read the definitions yourself, please.

http://ardictionary.com/Cheat/4405