.
June 2nd, 2008
02:13 PM ET

Memo to Obama Campaign: Why Fight Over Four Delegates?

Protesters rally as the Democratic National Committee Rules and Bylaws Committee prepares to meet at the Marriott Park Wardman hotel.

Protesters rally as the Democratic National Committee Rules and Bylaws Committee prepares to meet at the Marriott Park Wardman hotel.

Lanny J. Davis
Former special counsel to President Clinton
Supporter of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign

The thousands of Clinton supporters in the streets on Saturday in front of DC's Marriott Hotel, many of them from Florida and Michigan, were angry in the beginning of the day. At the end of the day, they were even angrier – with the prime focus of their ire Senator Barack Obama.

And the difference between a happy vs. an angry outcome was – I am not making this up – just four Michigan delegates, a forced switch of just four delegates from Senator Clinton's to Senator Obama's total.

This decision was made by a divided DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee over the strong objection of Senator Clinton's representative on the committee, Harold Ickes. It was made with the support of Senator Obama's campaign and his representatives on the Rules Committee.

Put aside the merits of the arguments on both sides and let's just look at the politics.

Senator Obama says at this stage he wants to promote party unity. The DNC Chair Howard Dean says the same thing. The party "leaders" we hear about more and more in the media say the same thing.

Yet when it came down to the crucial moments during Saturday afternoon's deliberations of the Rules Committee concerning the seating of the Michigan delegation, Senator Obama and his supporters on the committee drew a bright line over four delegates. Why?

Beats me.

Here's the simple math. The final split of the Michigan delegation supported by Senator Clinton's campaign was 73-55, reflecting the percentage results of the Michigan primary (55% votes won by Senator Clinton, 40% won by "uncommitted.") The Rules Committee decided to take four of those votes from Senator Clinton and give them to Senator Obama, so the final total was now Clinton 69 and Obama 59.

Mr. Ickes argued that the word "hijack" was appropriate regarding those four delegates because there was no legal basis for the Rules and Bylaws Committee - either under party rules as well as the Charter (constitution) of the Party for a DNC committee to take delegates from one candidate and award them to another; and certainly not to award delegates inconsistent with the "fair reflection" of the will of Democratic voters. Mr. Ickes rightly pointed out that the "fair reflection" requirement is a core requirement of the DNC's Charter – as fundamental a constitutional value for the Democratic Party as the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is to the American people.

The pro-Obama forces would argue that the Michigan primary was "flawed" because not everyone, including Senator Obama, was on the ballot. (It is also a fact that Senator Obama could have kept his name on the ballot under the party rules, as did Senators Clinton and Chris Dodd, but chose not to).

But putting the arguments pro- and con- aside, let's go back to the opening question, based on plain political considerations:

Why would Senator Obama want to draw a bright line over a difference of plus/minus four delegates? If that's what it would have taken to bring unity out of the Michigan – Florida rules fight, why not agree? Why risk exacerbating the problems Senator Obama already could have among the most loyal Clinton voters, many of them women, in the millions across the country and many in the critical battleground states?

Beats me.

The Clinton campaign has a decision to make – whether to go to the national convention's Credentials Committee to challenge what they argue is an unconstitutional and illegal transfer by the non-valid fiat of the Rules Committee of delegates committed to one candidate to another candidate. They feel they have a constitutional core principle to defend – the Charter's commitment to small "d" democracy and the rule of law. Rightly or wrongly, that may seem to be a principle worth taking to the Credentials Committee or even the convention floor.

If they do so, and the party remains divided between a candidate who won more delegates by a sliver of a margin vs. a candidate who won more popular votes out of more than 34 million cast - and virtually all the battleground and border states - it may well be that Senator Obama some day will ask senior officials in his campaign organization – why did we fight over four delegates when we didn't need to?

I can just hear someone answering him,

"Beats me."


Filed under: Barack Obama • Hillary Clinton • Raw Politics
soundoff (100 Responses)
  1. J.V.Hodgson

    Hey sir, Beats me, beats me, beats me!! As well. But welcome to politics. Also key fact the obama camp had the votes for a 50 50 split. Journalistic ethics demanded you mention that, and also that HRC was driving a much more unrealistic and unfair position. The State democrats supported the decision.
    True it makes little difference to the math, but politics not and never will be about just math.
    It is time for healing differences and unting the party and not spinning out a drama over 4 votes that by weekend will make no difference.
    Whether it beats you or not it happened and the credentials committee could change it, but look how many SD's have to vote for HRC and how many have to flip and ignore the voters or their own prior decision. On what grounds only god would ever know.This latter is the real buzz. Beats me why it did not get there!?
    Regards,
    Hodgson.

    June 3, 2008 at 9:41 am |
  2. JustADude

    Nina Singh,

    Let me ask you – what happens if he loses the general elections (without your vote) ?? Answer> Four more years of this Bush/Republican trash – and you will have to live with knowing you helped carve it out. I support Sen. Clinton but I´m so sick of this Republican administration that I´ll vote for our Democratic candidate who ever SHE is (never lose hope). But I warn you sitting at home being offended will certainly not change a thing afterall EVEN OBAMA is better than another four years of Republicans trash.

    June 3, 2008 at 9:35 am |
  3. AdamT.

    Grow UP and MOVE FORWARD people, cease the childish rhetoric at once. The DEMS need a reality check , seems as though the Clinton supporters are ravenous and naive. Saying "I will vote for McCain if Clinton cant win" is a sad reflection of who you are as a person(unloyal)!!! The Repubs got the right idea for the most part ,they suck back whatever bad feelings they have for their candidate and stand firmly behind him so they can continue to move their agenda forward, Dems should take out a pen and paper and start taking notes; School is in Session. Remember that Clinton and Obama see eye to eye on most issues, i am more than certain that when the tears clear everyone will vote smartly as they will be able to see clearly.

    June 3, 2008 at 9:26 am |
  4. JustADude

    To Maritza,

    You are right – the press has given more coverage to Sen. Obama over Sen. Clinton but that is in my humble opinion is because Sen. Clintons has been out there for so long that she´s got nothing new to say. To come to think of it Sen. Obama is a blessing to the media (I work at for a small local newspaper). The more the media covers him, the more they sell "news" – good or bad. But one thing you "fogot" to mention was Sen. Clinton´s negatives all along the primaries. She literally kept throwing the kitchen sink at Sen. Obama for good 6 months. Nobody take such a beating without striking back. So as both Hillary and Bill said "Quit whining ! If you can´t take the heat get out of the kitchen". There are no Saints on either side of this.

    June 3, 2008 at 9:18 am |
  5. Bill

    Davis, Ickes, Clinton make Nixon look like a poster boy for clean, honest election campaigns.

    June 3, 2008 at 9:03 am |
  6. marsha

    I dont see why the democratic party and its supporters are fighting over 4 votes. Michigan and Florida instigated this situation by breaking the rules. What is at greater stake here is not these candidates political interest, but world peace. As Barack as said many times, this race is not about him. A commentator on 360 Anderson stated that Obama is a threat to America's security. Obama said he would sit down and talk to our enemies and that what most President with any foresight and good judgement would do. Countries like Iran and North Korea will no longer tolerate being bullied by America. They want to be engaged in diplomatic dialogue. I believe McCain and Hilary Clinton, will follow the footsteps of Bush. Both these candidate would be a threat to world peace because of their stance on not talking to enemy countries. They have the same pigheaded attitude like Bush which has made the American people less safe. With the American economy floundering, the American people cannot afford to be in a third war at this time. The American government spoke to Russia for many years...why not extend this same courtesy to countries like Iran. Iran and North Korea are demanding to be respected and recognized like countries like France, Germany, Britian and to be given the same fair treatment. They wont tolerate being bullied. This is totally undemocratic and goes against what true democracy ought to be.

    June 3, 2008 at 6:15 am |
  7. Peter Damoah-Afari

    Hillary was even lucky to have had the advantage of getting more delegates. Obama could have argued for 50-50. So, she should keep quiet and accept defeat. She had the majority of the members of the committee in her camp, and they all did what was right.

    June 3, 2008 at 6:08 am |
  8. TonyInKentucky

    Less talk more action, sink tossers. Pay off Hillary's debt and fill McSame's coffers. If it's really "HILLARY OR MCCAIN!!", then there's more work to do than saber rattling and temper tantrums.

    Sure we'd love to have every vote we can get but it's becoming clear that it's better to count on new voters and disgruntled Republicans. It's clear cut that we have a candidate and I believe a small but vocal percentage of her supporters that put very individual concerns over those of the country and future generations. There's no depending on them. If there is a disagreement they threaten, blackmail, invent new rules, and toss out innuendo.

    I hope both surprise and act with the interests of the many as a guide.

    June 3, 2008 at 5:32 am |
  9. gwen

    I totally disagree with Bay B. concerning Barrack sitting in Church listening to Rev Wright for 20 yrs. I have visited that Church more than a couple times and I had never heard the things I heard from the Pastor or the visiting Priest. This Church does not preach on a regular basis in this manner. The Church is a bit more outspoken than I like but I know these type of services are not going on 52 weeks a year. I think both pastors were WAY OFF line to act the way they did. I think it was done to hurt Obama. I hope I am wrong. I was not sure how I was going to vote but Bill made up my mind after NC. I lost all respect for him.

    June 3, 2008 at 3:27 am |
  10. jwc, in SF, CA

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Let’s face it.
    1.Clinton was out coached by the Obama team.
    2.Clinton is the better and more talented player. Made a great come back, but was a dollar short and a day late after dumping her team, and doing it on her own.
    3.Obama is a lesser player going into the championship game.
    4.An all-star coaching staff going in with a wounded Obama may not be sufficient.
    5. Why would the supers go with a wounded star rather than the best.? Politics!, same old politics...just new faces now. Obama will be the new Clinton. But don't kid yourself, it's the sme old politics. Obama knows it, his people know it, we all know it...

    Now, what if Obama loses in November? Hillary will be blamed by the media and the Obamanites. The media and the Obamaanite surrogates are speaking wonderfully of Clinton's character and the fighter, etc. all Presidential qualities. ...and opining on what Obama has to do to reintroduce himselve and to the groups that he has not connected with, etc. Duhhhh!

    Let's go to the show with a wounded candidiate and rehabiliate him in the next few months...and hope the all star Obama coaches can hit the home run for the Dems. This makes no sense. The Dems are going to self destruct with this kind of logic. The Dems leadership just don't want to go with someone they "hope" to win because they are idealists and not with somone that can win. Clinton is also a candidtae of hope and vision. However, the Dems like the concept or idea of an Obama and not the ideas of Obama. Dems just like to socially engineer a result to fulfil a vision, not win against the Republican.

    You just can't hope for a result. I'm voting for McCain. I want the Dem to win, but I want to do an experiment and some political and social engineering. Hey, it's Ok, it just one vote. I don't agree with McCain on the war, but I rather do my experiment and waste my vote for him.

    June 3, 2008 at 3:11 am |
  11. Julie San Diego, CA

    Lanny,

    With the primaries concluding and both candidates supposedly neck and neck, at real issue are the "hearts and minds" of the superdelegates and political insiders who will, as predicted by a brilliant op-ed piece in the LA Times last fall, be the ones who will actually be deciding the fate of the Democratic party as we enter the Presidential election.

    Kind of disenfranchising to admit as a voter, but I mailed in my ballot anyway, knowing this would happen. Hope springs eternal...

    Which reminds me, California has yet another election (Eminent Domain issues) on June 3rd...forgot to mail in my ballot, guess I'll be dropping it off at the polls.

    Hmmm...Something else on June 3rd....what was it?...no, just a little early for Hubby's birthday...anything else happening on June 3rd, Anderson?

    Have a Happy One 🙂

    June 3, 2008 at 3:11 am |
  12. Nina

    I think the Democratic National Convention needs to have a better way of voting. Why can't the DNC do a country wide vote on the same day? Like we do in any election?

    This was a special year for us in Oregon, we actually had a say in the primaries for the first time in years. Having a same day, nationwide vote would have eliminated the issue of voting too early or some getting to vote while others don't always get a say in who runs for their party.

    Look at John McCain, how many people within the Republican party actually had a say in voting him as a nominee? Not enough, maybe that is what is wrong with the primaries in general.

    I'm proud of Hillary for sticking in this long, she's a strong, smart and capable leader. I was able to make my decision because I went to the rallies and I did the research to find her as my choice. Taking away Hillary's delegates in Florida and giving the extra delegates in Michigan to Barack really doesn't give the Democratic Party a very good name. It makes it almost looked fixed. Do we want a fixed race?

    June 3, 2008 at 2:22 am |
  13. annie

    The splits may not be right but the worst thing going on in this campaign is the hidden facts about OBAMA. Who could sit in a church for 20 years and Have his children taught by the people who attend that church and believe all those horrible things, can you imagine how they feel about the United States and White people. I believe everyone ought to take a step back and really look at what they are doing. I know if my children heard those things that obama says he didn't , I would be out of there cause I want my children to grow up with love for all people. What I can't understand is Obama is both black and white.

    June 3, 2008 at 1:35 am |
  14. Rob (White Anglophone Male - 45, Blue Collar OHIO)

    Stop your whining. If you have sour grapes complain to your local state delegations for trying to cheat the process. You are lucky that Obama made a concession or you might not have any delegates going to the convention.

    And for all of you bickering folks that say you won't vote in November – DON't. But don't you dare start whining when your party isn't in office.

    Change is coming and you can't stop it!!!

    OBAMA for President

    June 3, 2008 at 1:09 am |
  15. twiggy

    it really does not matter how this was decided or the outcome.
    the issue at hand is hilliary clinton. she verbally agreed not to campaign in michigan and florida and she signed a pledge.
    hilliary has proven her word neither her signature mean anything. she does not have character and she does not have integrity.
    i hope obama does not put her on the ticket she can not be trusted.
    and i really don't understand why more was not said about her dis-loyalty to the pledge she made; and the people who counted on her to stay within the rules.
    her campaign has been about her, not what is best for the voters- the american people, it is sad obama does not get credit for following the rules. yet i don't hear his side complaining.

    June 3, 2008 at 1:04 am |
  16. Sally

    I was an Edwards supporter until he dropped out; was undecided about who I preferred between Clinton and Obama. Watched and listened for several months and thought that I could support either Senator for our next President, especially considering how dire the consequences are for the rule of law, Supreme Court nominees, the future of foreign policy esp. in the middle east, civil liberties, and on and on.
    My impression of the Clintons started to decline when they started to praise McCain with the commander in chief test nonsense. Never praise your opponent, especially at the expense of your teammate and that is exactly what the Clintons have done. The scorched earth policy by Hillary's campaign has hurt the Democratic party.
    More is at stake than Hillary or the women that support her. I believe that Hillary understands this and will work toward a Democratic Presidency with or without all the angry women who now claim they will vote for John McCain, who, obviously, does not hold women's issues in high regard.
    I am a 45 yr old, white, middle class, college educated, married woman with two sons. Respectfully, do not vote against your interests by personalizing aspects of a primary when the country needs to return to our progressive values espoused by Democrats, not just Hillary or Obama.

    June 3, 2008 at 12:59 am |
  17. Raymond Duke Texas

    The Dnc were stupid in what they did. As a lifetime democrat I was ashame of the party. Why didn't they allow Florida and Michigan to re-vote. I tell you what I think, because florida and Michigan were going for Hillary and the democrat party leaders are for Obama . The leaders also had the gaul to say that voters in ohio , pennsylvania , west virginia and kentucky were racist. I hope they don,t need them states in the general election. I am originally from missouri and I can tell you that missouri went for Obama based on republican cross over. He will not win missouri in the general and McCaskil better get a job in Obama's administration because she will not be re-elected. He will not win the general with all his baggage and I predict that John McCain will win . He didn't have a chance against clinton and probably the democrats would have gained seats. After watching this election and seeing how the democrats played this game myself and four other adult voters in my family will vote for John McCain and we will also vote for the opponent of anybody that suppoerted a perdon and his wife who hate america as they do. John McCain and the republican party may stink but at least they didn't attend a racist church that spews hate for america for twenty years.

    June 3, 2008 at 12:31 am |
  18. Jorge

    It is true that the "Standings List" between Obama and Hillary are very similar.

    It is true that McCain has a very different standing.

    But I would vote for Hillary but not for Obama. I am not a Democrat, and I don't care about "party unity" - I care about the candidate and I believe in Hillary while I disagree with her in some things; and I believe in McCain, while I disagree with him in many things... But I CANNOT believe in Obama.

    I have been looking for the trajectory, the mistakes and the scandals... Hillary has many, true. But she stands firmly and accept to be wrong. I respect that.

    McCain looks a little more firm in his words and acts... and doesn't have as many things to dig in.

    Obama... well... is not "consistent"...
    New Politics? "It was on the rules" (Chicago election vs. Palmer)
    Name on the Ballot? His name was the ONLY NAME IN THE BALLOT (Idem)

    And for last... Wright (I refuse to use the "Rev.") was acknowledged as his guide for his identity as an African-American; according to his camp. I would fear to discover his identity if it has 1/10 of the "rabid" and "morbid" and divisive and "reverse racism" that was shown

    And before I am called "racist", I am part of a minority... actually "a minority in a minority of a minority".

    June 3, 2008 at 12:26 am |
  19. madeleine

    I support Hillary. I have voted democrat ever since i can i cannot forgive the dnc to what they have done. I urge all Hillary supporters not to vote for Obama if he is the nominee. I am not going to vote democrat. I will vote for McCain and ask all those Hillary supporters to do the same. Hillary may ask her supporters to vote democrat. but sorry Hillary I will not vote for Obama.

    Let us all go McCain.

    June 3, 2008 at 12:22 am |
  20. Phyllis

    It is amazing to me how shallow minded so many people can be in this day and age.

    To think at the age of 60 I would be absolutely befuddled by the comments of some of the people blogging. For someone like JudyAnn to have the audacity to want to continue to wallow in a state of inability to change is indeed a sad place for her to dwell. Michelle Obama has more patriotism in the sheer nod of her head than JudyAnn could muster from her sad state of sameness.

    Let the world move toward change, you poor thing, and maybe one day you too can look up and see the light that graces the Obama's.

    Be Blessed!!!

    June 3, 2008 at 12:15 am |
  21. Eleanor

    I used to be an Obama supporter until I saw the light. This man has
    exaggerated his accomplishments, stolen Hillary's platform and used it as his own, missed too many votes in the Senate, and does not even hold meetings on the very committe he chairs. Furthermore, how can a man who does not even know how many states there are in the Union lead as our President? The press has given Obama a free ride and, as a result, has given us an eloquent speaker who sounds great on the surface but has no real depth. If he is the nominee, I refuse to vote for him. Don't count on me or countless others to support him in November. Obama deserves Bill Clinton's outrage and the outgrage of supporters who are finally speaking up in support of Hillary.

    June 3, 2008 at 12:11 am |
  22. SC Gal

    Four Delegate means 600,000 voters for Obama.
    According to Ickies those were not just the four voters.
    It was the lack of reasoning.

    Clinton was on the ticket and got her votes.
    Obama took his name off the ticket.
    They gave Obama all the "undecided" voters which is actually it's own category, all Senator Edwards and then too 4 delegates and 600,000 voters.

    Florida is angry. Michigan is angry. Those states most likely will not vote for Obama. Sad to say, I am one of them.

    June 3, 2008 at 12:01 am |
  23. Sonya

    What an incredible mistake made by a man who has made mistake after mistake.

    I am a Clinton supporter and I'm really tired of angry comments made by Obama supporters about those of us who still support Hillary Clinton. "Suck it up....move on, it's over....stop whining" I've got news for you. We're not whining people. We're sticking up for our rights and yours!! The right to a fair election in a country that is supposed to be a democracy! People fought and died on battlegrounds so that you could vote for a President. If you don't care about how your vote is counted or NOT counted, why don't you go live in a country where you have no rights and if you even talk about the government you are thrown in jail or shot.

    IF HE REALLY WANTED TO UNITE THE PARTY: The decent thing for Obama to do would have been to stick to the agreement that allowed both states delegates 1/2 vote. That would have showed him to be THE BIGGER PERSON. But, no, he hijacked 4 of Hillary's delegates and drove the rift between each candidate's supporters even deeper. That is NOT the way to promote healing. THERE WILL BE NO UNITY. 17 million voters in this country are supporting Hillary Clinton, not to mention, she's had several landslide wins herself. Anyone who puts her down and overlooks her success is simply an idiot. Her supporters are going to vote for McCain in the fall and it will mostly be due to a split in the party that was caused by the DNC and the mockery they caused in the Florida and Michigan primaries. They punished the Florida voters because the Republican government moved up the primary date! They are sending Obama down the wrong path, throwing Hillary under the bus and destroying the integrity of the party!!! They are playing right into the hands of the Republicans.... Simpletons..... all of them!!!

    June 2, 2008 at 11:54 pm |
  24. SC Gal

    Senator Clinton is the best and most likely to win in this campaign.
    Obama can't win the white vote, the women vote, Latino voters, women votes, Jewish votes, Cuban votes and Swing voters.

    I agree with Clinton supporters, 17 million of us. The media has attacked all the Clintons. Thank God Chelsea got a break.

    How many times does the media have to hear it : yes with your polls-the media has been cruel to Senator Clinton.

    Last of All, Whites are mad at Obama for not defending Whites and Hillary Clinton when his friend Father Pfleagar for spewing hate to her and President Clinton.

    The DNC should have even stepped up. What would Obama do, if he was called a black man with a vicious tone and with crowds of Senator Clinton's church laughing at him.

    Could you imagine. Clinton would have had to step down,
    Race is so unfair to whites too.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:54 pm |
  25. Ben Funk

    For any process; once it begins the rules cannot be changed. I believe that the decision made by the rules committee should anger both Obama and Clinton supportors. In order for a rules forming body to have any integrity, they must uphold their rulings. Rules must be followed even if they prove to be unfair in the end. The correct decision is to apologize for the mistake and change the rule to aviod this mess in the future. If both candidates are so concerned about counting the FL and MI votes, then they should have spoken up when the decision was made instead of agreeing.

    We've all seen the football game where our team lost because the game winning completion was called incomplete and ruled not reviewable. Though it might seem unfair, these rules are what make the process work and there is a place and time when they can be changed; after the game.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:53 pm |
  26. rg

    Unfortunately people don't see beyond the candidate. Those that are voting for Obama don't really know what hides behind the man. You should do more research to understand that Obama is engaged with the Enemy! PLO, FARC in Colombia, etc... please Americans wake up before is too late!!!!
    Don't you think that there is something wrong that someone that has so few experience in politics is a nominee? Don't you ever ask yourselves where all the money for his campaign came from?
    Why would someone be a good president for all the Americans while half of his life he had been hearing and supporting racism, anti-Semitism?
    Suspicious!!!! Don't hope for the best with Obama

    June 2, 2008 at 11:50 pm |
  27. John

    Do you really believe that because Obama separated himself from his church of 20 years hearing all that BS I am going to vote for him?
    I think you guys are disillusion.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:39 pm |
  28. Ash

    I am sick and tired of all the negative media the Clintons have to face.
    Everytime Senator Clinton has a big win or she is in the limelight the media has to drum up something to shoot her down. I am disgusted the way that she has been treated because it is a direct reflection how society still views woman. If she is to aggressive they have something to say, if she shows any emotion she is weak. Double standards. I will never and I mean never vote for Obama. I think the democratic party is dishonest and unfair and they have all these loopholes to bring in the party of choice. I am voting for McCain. At least I know what he is about. For all your commentators thinking that we will forget over the next months about what happened to Senator Clinton you better think twice.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:34 pm |
  29. Carol

    Why should Hilary have all the votes? Did she agree with the rules set by the DNC. did she not say that " Michigan and Florida votes would not count? Now when she's losing the DNC have to change to rules to please her? As DNC member said refering to Ex- governor of michigan " my mother said , if you don't play by the rules then you are cheating " I think Hillary want to cheat the process and that is not right. We as adults should teach our children the importance of "keeping our word, play by the rules, and if we lose be gracious. " Four points is important when you look @ some of the voodo math the Clintons used to say she is winning the presidental elections even when everyone else see it completely diffently given the numbers.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:30 pm |
  30. janelle - missouri

    The only outcome Hillary Clinton, Harold Ickes and the rest of Hillary's supporters would be happy with would be to give Florida full votes with the results from the invalid primary, and to give Michigan full votes with resultf from the invalid primary,and Hillary getting her 55 percent of the delegates she "earned" while giving no delegates at all to Obama since those votes were cast for "uncommitted" and not an actual candidate. This way Hillary would now have the pledged delegate lead. Any solution other than this would not be found acceptable by the Clinton camp, even if Hillary kept the 73 delegates instead of 69!

    I understand the voters in these two states are upset, but where was all this outrage when it was announced the DNC was stripping them of their delegates? Why wasn't there an outcry then to have the date of the primary changed to a date that complied with DNC rules so that their delegates would have been seated. Florida dediced upon their primary date in May of 07. In August the DNC stripped them of their delegates. There was still time for the voters of Floriday to demand a new primary date. As for Michigan, they set their primary date in September, after they had already seen that the DNC was serious about states not breaking DNC rules or face the consequences.

    My memo to the Clinton campaing would be "why try to change the rules half way through the game, it just shows that your word means nothing, and if we wanted a president we couldn't trust, we'd just let Bush change the constitution so we could have a true Bush third term."

    June 2, 2008 at 11:28 pm |
  31. Jack

    Why is it that the Clinton team and the candidate herself agreed to the punishment of Florida and Michigan when it did not matter? I also would be very interested to know who on the DNC rules commitee voted for those punishments. I would bet my left arm Harold Ickes and the others who were there this weekend complaining voted for those rules in the begining. I wish that would be asked by the reporters and made public. One last thing how hard would Clinton have fought if the tables had been turned? I bet we wouldn't have heard all the count every vote reteric. I'm voting Libertarian.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:23 pm |
  32. herman

    Lanny:
    Bill and Hillary Clinton are tantamount to the mordern-day Orval Faubus. They want to stand at the door of the White House and block President Obama from entering. Well the American people are the federalized National Guard and will escort him in. Do you really believe all the stuff that you espouse.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:14 pm |
  33. Nina Singh

    Lenny You are right!
    I am surprised how we Americans can be so blind sometimes.Hillary is the tough fighter we need to put this country on the right track.She is the CHANGE we need.
    Mr.Obama is never going to win–Wake up and smell the coffee, people.I don't plan to vote in the General election if Obama is the nominee and neither do a lot of other women I have talked to. Democratic party has treated Hillary unfairly and it will come back to haunt them.I don't want her to accept VP either.Why should she when she is a better "man" then Obama for the job.
    I didn't want Republicans to win ever again, but now I am so offended by the bais against Hillary, I will sit out the election along with my group of friends.

    June 2, 2008 at 11:04 pm |
  34. Mary

    Super Delegates please wake up!! don't be persuaded by the fake guy, be a hero by making your final decision. It is in your hand that will save America, it's not too late yet. Please don't be persuaded by a fake guy try to investigate his past and you will be satisfied w/ your decision. God Bless You all!! "Please don't let the light off from Armican people"

    June 2, 2008 at 10:57 pm |
  35. Pat

    Clinton supporters, we must continue organizing to vote either Hillary or McCain this coming election, and in case she won't be the nominee, we must e-mail her never to take the 2nd post if Barack will offer since it is not fair that the better one will be behind. Regardless of what will happen we must not vote for Barack the liar and the cheater.

    June 2, 2008 at 10:45 pm |
  36. Jeanette Maddox

    Anderson , after watching your show Monday eve. i have to say once again there are hundreds if not thousands of us all over the United States that will not under no circumstance will ever vote for obama .he can reach all he wants and it will note make any difference. i hope and pray he will not be our president what an awful sad day if he is. Wake up everyone .before its too late Jeanette Maddox

    June 2, 2008 at 10:42 pm |
  37. Lonell

    I'm amazed by all of the ignorance that people are displaying with these comments. First of all lets be clear Hillary, and Obama pretty much have the same standings on all the major issues. But I hear all of these people saying that they won't vote for Obama if he is the nominee they will vote for McCain.

    That bothers me because even though I support Obama if something changed and Hillary was the nominee I would support her. I'm not against her I'm just for Obama.

    So all of these people that are saying we won't support Obama that just lets me know that you're not really interested in putting a Democrat in the white house you're just interested in a certain canidate and that's it.

    I'm interested in promoting the democratic party no matter who the canidate is. I wouldn't vote for McCain just because Hillary was the nominee, Thats Stupid and Irresponsible.

    So if you say that I won't support Obama, I don't want to here any complaining about gas prices, the economy, the war, healthcare, or the housing problem.

    Because if you think that things are going to change with McCain in the white house you're just as crazy as he is.

    And as far as Lanny's comments are concerned

    Lanny GROW UP!!!!!

    June 2, 2008 at 10:41 pm |
  38. DJM

    What I find ugly about the Clinton campaign is the way they can state a lie as fact with a straight face. Michigan: ONLY HILARY WAS ON THE BALLOT! all candidates agreed this primary would not count: millions did not go vote! THIS WAS NOT AN PRIMARY ELECTION. That any votes would be counted at all is amazing.

    We condemn countries for having one party elections and the claim they are democracies (Mexico under PRI, Russia, etc.) Florida and Michigan were not democratic elections. They should have held a new election.

    The Rules Committee apparently made a political decision to give Michigan seats so they would not abandon the party; the only fair way of dividing the delegates would have been 50/50. That Hilary got what she got; is generous.

    Their whining about the split is like a bank robbers complaining the bank did not have enough money.

    June 2, 2008 at 10:34 pm |
  39. Pat

    Guys you don't know well barack Obama, who he was 20 yrs ago? He had lots of lies just to capture the nomination. I thought Americans are smart and wise people, how could you not detect the character of Barack Obama? It's so obvious for what he said and spoken during his campaign, he's a flip flopper and very pretentious. He grew up in Indonesia as a muslim, he converted into christian since he knew that he will never reach his political goal being a muslim. he didn't care of what christian church is talking because he's not a christian in heart and thought. he's a bogus and a big threat to Americans!

    June 2, 2008 at 10:31 pm |
  40. erik

    let it go lenny, you wine too much

    June 2, 2008 at 10:18 pm |
  41. Betty

    If Obama wins, I will vote for McCAnn

    June 2, 2008 at 10:16 pm |
  42. Cavell Cox ,Texas

    Question? Why doesnt Hillary Clinton run as an INDEPENDANT as I believe Obama wont beat McCain

    June 2, 2008 at 10:15 pm |
  43. Loretta from California

    It was adhere to the rules, or compromise. What kind of compromise was the Clinton Campaign expecting?

    June 2, 2008 at 10:15 pm |
  44. Jacqueline

    Great point Bruce, St Paul MN!!! When will the question be asked, how fair is it to Obama that the rules changed mid-stream? When the game clock runs down in a football game, the loosing team can still run into the endzone, but there wont be a touchdown called. The rules are the rules.

    June 2, 2008 at 10:14 pm |
  45. Sandy

    Hillary Clinton should not of conveniently left her name on the ballot in Michigan an mis-lead Flordia with her funraising before the primary. This is what caused this mess.

    June 2, 2008 at 10:01 pm |
  46. Kathie

    Senator Obama is going to have this nomination "handed" to him. His campaign refused to agree to the offer of a revote in Florida and Michigan because they knew Hillary would win. Obama refused any more debates because Hillary mopped the floor with him at the last one. Vote-wise, Obama is stalled at the finish line while Hillary is tearing up jack in the final elections, yet the superdelegates are "handing" Obama their support, even though he's lost his momentum. Back at the beginning of these contests, the pundits on TV were warning that the superdelegates had better not make the Obama supporters feel like he was "strong-armed" out of the nomination. It's obvious that they don't care that it's actually happening to Hillary.

    June 2, 2008 at 9:51 pm |
  47. Jolene

    I watched and felt the outcome was the best that could be done considering the circumstances. I was more upset that the DNC Rules Committee chose to debate the options "behind closed doors" rather than in public. It was disappointing to say the least. The debate would have been the best part to watch live, IMO.

    I also thought I heard Dodds mention in an interview that there was a fee to remove your name from the Michigan ballot which really makes you wonder what the real reason was that made Obama take his name off that ballot. After watching the proceedings on Saturday, my conclusion is that the DNC Rules Commitee needs to readdress this whole allocation of delegates/superdelegates. Way too complex when it really doesn't need to be.

    Jolene, St. Joseph, MI

    June 2, 2008 at 9:44 pm |
  48. Annie Kate

    4 delegates isn't going to make a difference to Clinton or Obama. I do wonder though why Obama did not reject the delegates since this sounds like it was against the rules and he used the rules so well in Chicago to get his first office.

    The Democrats have made a big mess of this race; they shouldn't be surprised if in the fall they lose.
    .
    Annie Kate
    Birmingham AL

    June 2, 2008 at 9:24 pm |
  49. Angie

    The Democratic party WILL NOT get my vote in November if Obama becomes the nominee. I don't want Hillary taking a VP slot either because she is the stronger candidate. I'm not a bitter Democrat, I just don't believe Obama is qualified to be President of the United States. I believe his resignation from Trinity is for political purposes only – does he think Americans are stupid or just plain ignorant? From my viewpoint, he has no experience, appears arrogant, anti-American, racist, and the list goes on. If Hillary Clinton is not the Democratic nominee or doesn't run as an Independent – I will only vote for McCain in November.

    June 2, 2008 at 9:06 pm |
  50. Heather

    I agree with you
    Lanny all the way. I watched the entire thing . I want Sen Clinton to take it all the way. On the principle and on the integrity of the people who voted. People ih other countries die for the right to vote. They also die for their vote to be counted. Why bother have the people in this country vote if their wishes are not honored and the schmucks for politicians decide that they will be the ones who decide not us. That Michigan formula is any outrage! Its craziness (I forgot how to spell it in yiddish). I dont care what Obama says fair true and right. Take it all the way Hillary! The people have voted and our votes count!

    June 2, 2008 at 9:01 pm |
1 2