Democratic Party | Election 2008 | Florida | News

Florida Will Not Hold a "Do-Over" Democratic Primary

Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Karen Thurman just announced it's not gonna happen:

Florida"Last week, the Florida Democratic Party laid out the only existing way that we can comply with DNC Rules - a statewide revote run by the Party - and asked for input. Thousands of people responded. We spent the weekend reviewing your messages, and while your reasons vary widely, the consensus is clear: Florida doesn’t want to vote again. So we won’t. A party-run primary or caucus has been ruled out, and it’s simply not possible for the state to hold another election, even if the Party were to pay for it. Republican Speaker of the Florida House Marco Rubio refuses to even consider that option. Florida is finally moving to paper ballots, which is a good thing, but it means that at least 15 counties do not have the capacity to handle a major election before the June 10th DNC primary deadline. This doesn’t mean that Democrats are giving up on Florida voters. It means that a solution will have to come from the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee, which is scheduled to meet again in April."

Previously
DNC Chair Dean Urges Florida and Michigan to Re-do Contests [tr]

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Just split the delegates half and half and move on. JFC.

    Posted by: Adam | Mar 17, 2008 6:34:09 PM


  2. All three of their names (Clinton, Obama and Edwards) were on the ballot. None of them physically campaigned there. So they are all on equal footing there, yes? No!

    (It seems B.O. was running television ads in the states. (If anyone can prove or refute this, or prove that one or both the others also ran ads in the states, that would be great!)

    Now, if BO was the only one running TV ads in the state, he has no right to claim the results of the state as unfair. The whole primary was conducted by the book and the results were conducted by the book. If Clinton and Edwards played by the rules in that state, the results should be counted and the delegates ought to be seated.

    Posted by: James | Mar 17, 2008 6:41:55 PM


  3. Hillary went to the state to raise money days before the election, but her presence there might as well have been seen as campaigning there. She was also there on the day of the election to "thank the voters, and show her support."

    I guess it's a gray area. Somewhat like Hillary taking her name off the ballot in MI, and then putting it back on at the last minute after conferring with Michigan's governor.

    Posted by: Cadence | Mar 17, 2008 6:47:47 PM


  4. That'd be fine except for the part where the whole primary was against the rules.

    I don't think anyone was running ads in FL, though, because they all signed this around Sep. 1 of last year. Clinton did go to Florida to have fundraisers (and a little bit of media time) after that. I don't know if Obama did or not. Clinton did go and declare victory after she pledged not to take part in the primary, though. Stay classy!

    Posted by: Adam | Mar 17, 2008 6:52:49 PM


  5. The "this" I refer to above is the FL Campaign pledge: http://www.fladems.com/page/-/documents/THREE_pledge_versions.pdf

    Posted by: Adam | Mar 17, 2008 6:58:49 PM


  6. None of the candidates broke rules re: florida. All of them were allowed to fundraise in Florida, and all of them (to the best of my knowledge) did so. Furthermore, Barack's ads did appear in Florida, but that's only because they were broadcast on national tv - which wasn't a violation of the rules.

    All that said, Florida Democrats are making a TREMENDOUS mistake. If their delegates aren't seated and the will of the voters aren't heard, then it could doom us in the general election. And, as a party activist, I'd really, really hate to see that. They either need to seat the delegates as was determined in the first Florida primary, an election where all the candidates played by the same rules, or they need to have a redo of the primary. I reject the fact that it can't be done; Republicans and Democrats will support it over that speaker, if necessary (republicans will love it because it'll cost the party millions of dollars, dems will vote for it because we need it). We can have a paper ballot sent to every registered democrat in the state of florida, or even everyone who's eligible to vote in the dem primary (or even only those who voted in the first primary)... and have them mail it in like an absentee ballot, or like a huge chunk of the population does so in Oregon. Furthermore, for the entire state of Florida, that would only cost about $6 million and would be completely fair. Win, win, win to me.

    Posted by: Ryan | Mar 17, 2008 7:30:46 PM


  7. Didn't they have paper ballots in the 2000 election? Wasn't that a problem?

    Posted by: anon | Mar 17, 2008 7:37:35 PM


  8. JAMES, I live in Florida and I can tell you that Hillary flew into Sarasota a day or two before the primary and gave speeches where she told Florida voters that she was the ONLY candidate who cared enough to come to Florida and she was the ONLY candidate that cared about Floridians.

    Those of us in the Tampa Bay area saw quite a bit of coverage of Hillary "not campaigning" here.

    I don't understand why NONE of the national media reported on this obvious violation of the agreement that ALL of the Democratic candidates signed on to.

    How does this information factor into your deductive reasoning?

    This was a complete set-up by Florida Republicans ONCE AGAIN to screw Democrats in Florida. Yes, the Dems. in the legislature went along with it because the Republicans attached it to a bill that called for paper trails to back up our completely corrupt Diebold voting machines. The Republicans told the Democrats that it was their ONLY way to get the paper trail. The Dems in the legislature, not realizing how all of this would shake out and how important Florida would turn out to be, decided that it was more important for them to get the paper trail so that we could avoid yet another 2000 debacle.

    But the Democrats would rather tear each others eyes out rather than focusing their anger and attention on our political opponents.

    Some things never frickin change!

    Posted by: Zeke | Mar 17, 2008 7:46:30 PM


  9. When Floridan's voted, all the candidates had followed the rules and had not campaigned in the state. But by that time all had been seen on many TV debates, been featured in magazines and newspapers. Plus all had web sites to sell their candidates. In the end Sen. Clinton won with the most votes of over 1.7 million cast. I say NO to a redo, no one wins a redo and Hillary already won and would win bigger if there was another primary.

    Posted by: David in Iowa | Mar 17, 2008 7:53:36 PM


  10. None of this matters now because Obama shot himself in the foot this weekend. Story is over Obamaheads, say goodnight.

    Posted by: patrick nyc | Mar 17, 2008 8:29:18 PM


  11. @zeke--"Those of us in the Tampa Bay area saw quite a bit of coverage of Hillary "not campaigning" here.

    I don't understand why NONE of the national media reported on this obvious violation of the agreement that ALL of the Democratic candidates signed on to."

    Um... maybe because it never happened?

    Oh, and BTW, as much as I wish it weren't so: we should all stop blaming this year's Florida mess solely on Republicans. The vote to move the primary WAS UNANIMOUS. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,269898,00.html

    Posted by: scottevill | Mar 17, 2008 9:32:28 PM


  12. It most certainly DID happen.

    http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080128/NEWS/801280404/-1/xml&display=ClintonapparentlybreaksDemocratspledgenottocampaigninFlorida

    All the local news stations interviewed her saying that she was the only one to care enough to come to Florida and meet with the Florida voters.

    The next day she went to West Palm Beach and did the same thing. THAT IS CAMPAIGNING!

    I find it amazing that someone who gets his news from Fox News Channel has the audacity to call me a liar about something that I personally witnessed in my own state and in my own community.

    Yet another anti-Democrat Republican campaigning for Hillary.

    Posted by: Zeke | Mar 17, 2008 10:25:59 PM


  13. Peter

    Unless you know about some dead girl or live boy in Obama's bed then he didn't shoot himself in the foot.

    If you are refering to a sermon by his former preacher that took place back in 2002 and which he never attended, then you are smoking some great shit. Pass that and stop bogarting.

    :-)

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Mar 17, 2008 11:03:42 PM


  14. Bi the way ... I'm Bi and I want you?
    A friend of mine came to visit and we got on the discussion on bisexuality and gays. She said she supported the Gay lifestyle, that was their choice ... ok, great start ... then she said "but I can't understand bisexuality. You either like a side or you don't! They must be a confused bunch." ... ok, baaaaaaad baaaaaad ending. I don't have homosexual experiences too. I'm also be a bisexual curious. I just wish it were easier to handle in certain situations ...Then I join a bisexual site http://www.BiRomances.com but they need to pay. Sorry, I'm pool. Can you share yours with us?
    Bi, Bi, Bi...

    Posted by: ben | Mar 17, 2008 11:22:00 PM


  15. @zeke--"I find it amazing that someone who gets his news from Fox News Channel has the audacity to call me a liar about something that I personally witnessed in my own state and in my own community."

    Your link doesn't show her campaigning, it shows her getting out of a car to head into a fundraiser, and shaking hands with people on the rope line on her way in. That's not campaigning. She didn't get up on a stage, she didn't do her stump speech. Not. Campaigning. (I'm willing to bet that the other candidates did similar when arriving at their Florida fundraisers.)

    In any case, you'll have to forgive a skeptical reaction over your Hillary claim when the very next thing out of your mouth was this mythical "Republicans forced Florida Dems to move primary." I'm a tried-and-true Democrat who is more than willing to blame the Republicans when something is their fault, but a simple check of the vote stats shows that the bill in question was sent to Governor Crist for signature not by a simple majority vote, which the Republicans--who control the Florida state House--would have won without a single vote from the minority Dems. Nope--What the record shows is passage by a UNANIMOUS, BIPARTISAN vote of 110-0. (The Fox News link was just the first one I found with the stats, but you can take your pick. Or you can go to the state's official website, where the votes are plaining posted for all to see.)

    Myth debunked. Now, onto the inevitable collapse of the Obama campaign . . .

    Posted by: scottevill | Mar 17, 2008 11:27:56 PM


  16. Try checking sources other than Fox News for the Florida Democrats explanation of why they supported the legislation. I explained it above but don't take my word for it but you won't find the story on Fox.

    Here's the real deal. I'm pretty convinced that the Democratic party is in colapse at this point. I don't think that either Democrat has a shot in hell of winning in November because of the UNBELIEVABLE level of hatred and venom that has torn our party apart. Check the archives, Hillary may not be my first choice for the nomination but I have never been hateful and vile about her. Additionally, I may disagree strongly with some of Hillary's supporters, their opinions, their methods and/or their style but I have never been uncivil, disrespectful or rude to any of her supporters on Towleroad.

    You may not like it. No Hillary supporter may like to hear it but Hillary, no matter how you figured it, didn't have the numbers to win without getting the Super Delegates to overturn the pledged delegates and the popular vote. I can't imagine anything less DEMOCRATIC for the DEMOCRATIC Party to do. I'm stunned that Hillary supporters seem OK with that and I'm surprised they are willing to absolutely rip the Democratic party apart to make that happen. I can't imagine how anyone thinks that the Democratic Party would survive such a convention blood bath, where voters would feel that their votes were trumped by the political elite, and come out on the other side in any shape to win a general election. That just seems extremely obvious and practical to me.

    Here is another issue that I keep bringing up but NO ONE seems to want to talk about:

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/17/many_voting_for_clinton_to_boost_gop/

    Once again, I think the Dems are completely screwed and we are looking at another eight years of more of the same including another (minimum) TWO Supreme Court Justices appointed. Say good-bye to personal freedoms. Say good-bye to choice. Say good-bye to advancements in gay rights and get ready to see court rulings that take gay rights backwards.

    But hey, as long as we can keep Obama from getting the Democratic nomination, who cares. Right?

    Posted by: Zeke | Mar 18, 2008 12:18:29 AM


  17. I'm trying to remain somewhat openminded about this.

    If someone, anyone, can point me to a site that shows, by the numbers, how Hillary can win the nomination without having the Super Delegates usurp the pledged delegates and popular vote, please post the link. I would love to see it. I don't even care if it comes from a Hillary website. I want to see how it could happen because I've been looking, for my own education, and I can't find it.

    I would like to ask Hillary supporters; would you support Super Delegates overruling the pledged delegates and the popular vote if that was the only way that Hillary could get the nomination?

    If not and if it was proven that she couldn't win without such a Super Delegate coup, would you still want her to continue her campaign for the nomination?

    Those seem to be the two most pertinent questions that need to be considered at this point, for the sake of the party.

    Posted by: Zeke | Mar 18, 2008 12:30:45 AM


  18. Surely, it would be un-democratic for super delegates to vote for Obama just because he has a tiny lead in the delegate count and they feel they have too. If this is the case then there are no point in having super delegates and they should be scrapped.

    If the majority of super delegates feel Hillary would be a better president then they should vote for and if this overrules the pledged delegates,then c'est la vie.

    I also, don't think this will rip the Democratic party apart. I believe most Obama supporters will get behind Hillary if she wins and vice versa.

    Posted by: Asterix | Mar 18, 2008 5:24:51 AM


  19. ZEKE,

    the media did not expose hillary's mischief in fl. because they have been pro-hill and anti-obama all along.

    i am starting to worry about you.

    Posted by: nic | Mar 18, 2008 6:50:42 AM


  20. Jimmyboyo, Kennedy had "some dead girl" and he's still Senator and campaigning for Obama. I guess a $5000/hr hooker trumps a dead girl. We'll see if a racist spiritual leader trumps them all.

    Posted by: z | Mar 18, 2008 7:33:23 AM


  21. The writing is on the wall. It's McCain v. Obama in November and McCain wins. And then we all lose.

    Obama's sparkle and shine is rapidly fading. Hillary almost certainly will not find a way to win the nomination. Although I have never really been a fan, she would have been the best president among all the available options. Obama will surprise us during the general election, and not favorably.

    Posted by: YankinTex | Mar 18, 2008 8:44:56 AM


  22. I thought the democratic party believed every vote should be counte and count. maybe only when it doesn't benefit them

    Posted by: ousslander | Mar 18, 2008 8:57:25 AM


  23. Zeke: You're absolutely right (as usual). The current ugliness of this primary battle is exactly what I and many other "neutral" Democrats had feared. It is a Republican 2008 dream come true. Those of you who believe that the Hillary forces can steal this nomination, and still get the turn out of Obama supporters they'll need are living in a fantasy (as Big Cigar Bill Clinton would say). At this point too many Obama supporters are ready to stay home if we have an "dishonest" outcome at the convention.

    Now, something a little controversial: these tactics that the Clinton Campaign have used the last month should have been used much earlier. Yes, I said it. If they were going to turn Barack into the "black candidate" (a la Jesse Jackson) then they sould have done it back in Iowa. Waiting until South Carolina to start that shit was too obvious & stupid, BILL CLINTON. Too many of us believed in him by then--not just black Democrats. The Clinton Campaign never expected Barack Obama to do as well as he did (neither did I or most older Black Americans). Now, the Clinton Camp wants to use Obama's race to stop him from getting the nomination. It's too late for that. Continue this strategy and instead of getting a 80% turn out of Obama Independents and black Democrats for Hillary, they would only get a 50% to 60% turn out. They would loose Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and maybe even Maryland & New Jersey. John McCain will be president for atleast 4 years.

    Let the fight be fair from now till August, or accept the fact that the Democratic Party took an historic risk in early 2008, and then punked out by summer.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Mar 18, 2008 9:48:46 AM


  24. z

    Kenedy's dead girl wasn't in bed.

    We can debate the facts of that car accident if you like just like we can debate the facts about Vince foster's death

    A side note on Rev Wright. Rev Wright has been a vocal supporter of gay marriage for years.

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Mar 18, 2008 10:12:28 AM


  25. Why is Florida ALWAYS causing drama?

    Posted by: Cody | Mar 18, 2008 11:37:44 AM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Barack Obama to Give 'Major Race Speech' Tomorrow« «