Bill Clinton: Florida, Michigan Penalty "Appropriate"

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/bill-clinton--1.html

May 22, 2008 11:30 AM

ABC News' Rick Klein and Sarah Amos Report: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday flatly rejected a proposal by Sen. Barack Obama to penalize Florida by seating only half of its convention delegates -- despite the fact that former President Bill Clinton and other top Clinton campaign officials have floated that idea as a possible compromise.

In an interview with the St. Petersburg Times, Obama, D-Ill., called the idea of cutting Florida's delegation in half "a very reasonable solution" to the party's stand-off over how to treat a primary contest that was not sanctioned by the Democratic National Committee.

Sen. Clinton dismissed the suggestion, saying she would insist on 100 percent representation for Florida.

"I think that is disingenuous but it's also insulting to the 1.7-million Floridians who actually turned out to vote," Clinton, D-N.Y., said of Obama's proposal, according to the newspaper.

But just last week, Bill Clinton called giving Florida half its delegates -- similar to how the Republican National Committee penalized the state for holding an earlier-than-allowed contest -- an "appropriate penalty."

"The Republican Party said 'OK, we'd like to win Florida in the fall so we are gonna invoke our rule, they got out of turn, we will seat their delegates as half a delegate and seat their superdelegates,' " Clinton said at a campaign event in Missoula, Mon. "That is an appropriate penalty."

Later in the same speech, he pointed out that the same penalty was applied by the GOP to Michigan, which also held a primary earlier than the party allowed.

"The Republican Party knows that John McCain is popular in Michigan and would actually have a chance to win, notwithstanding the fact that it is the most hard-hit state in America, so they did what the rules permit, they are sitting the Michigan delegates as half delegates," he said. "But the Democratic party because -- for a lot of reasons, they decided to destroy the Michigan campaign."

Two weeks ago, Clinton campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said on NBC's "Meet the Press" said the campaign "certainly might" agree to a compromise whereby the primary results would be used to award half of the Michigan and Florida’s allotted number of delegates.

McAuliffe, a former DNC chairman, noted that such a penalty would be in accordance with the DNC's own rules.

"The rule is 50 percent," McAuliffe said. "Had they done that, we wouldn't be having this discussion."

A leading Clinton supporter in Michigan, DNC member Joel Ferguson, is pushing a similar plan.

Top Clinton adviser Harold Ickes was among the DNC members who voted last year to strip all of Michigan and Florida's delegates, though he has more recently insisted that the delegates be awarded to the two states.

what Obama said is 100% true. back in January, his name wasn't even known by a third of the voters.

Claiming she WON those votes is like Abraham Lincoln going up against Joe Smith -- guess who people will vote for?

The implication that the Florida voters who stayed home do not have any rights is simply breathtaking. One can only hope the superdelegates feel their pain more than Clinton does.

Keep hitting her on that, full seating is out of the question, these primaries were NOT legit, they were name recognition tests at best, and many voters stayed home or voted in the Republican primaries. Keep bringing that up because the media apparently hasn't noticed that not-so-subtle point:

http://www.thepersonalispolitical.com/2008/05/hillary-questions-principles-of.html

I can't stand her. "Be nice to me or I won't work to have my supporters unite with you. All the while, I'll stab you in the back and push ridiculous BS in order to sabotage you anyways."

It's time for Obama to take the offensive and let Clinton know in no uncertain terms that she'll destroy any legacy or any chance at influence within the administration if she does not act with dignity.

And Hell no to VP!

This is fun. I didn't think we'd lose this, of all, elections. But now I get to see how we can screw even the best of chances. Hillary supporters hate Obama. Obama supporters hate Hillary. People are now sufficiently deranged candidate partisans that the actual issues mean jack. Sigh!

Keep this up folks! I'll have a few good stories to tell me kids about why their mom is in jail for having an abortion, or why 25% of this country lives in poverty.

You know, as much as I have been accused of being a Hillary hater, I actually wasn't until yesterday. I hate her so much.

She is doing the lowest of the lowest things she could have thunkup - trying to set herself up as Al Gore, the victim, from whom the nomination is being stolen.

I absolutely hate and loathe her for this. It makes me sick. 2000 was one of the worst things that ever happened to Democrats and for her to use it like this is tantamount to how Bush and the Repugs have used 9/11.

Hillary Clinton is a Republican - it's written all over her. I can't stand her.

No freaking way.

Count their votes and stop hating Democracy Oilbama.

The Senate passed the Webb GI bill with veto proof majority.

McCain cut and ran on the vote.

Webb is a leader, Obama is not.

Hillary has stoked the flames of this "disenfranchisement" more than anyone. She's the one who's tried desperately to make it an issue.

How come no one is talking about all of the potential voters who stayed home because they were told that the primary wasn't going to count for anything?

If the SuperDelegates and "leaders" of the Democratic Party don't step in and stop this nonsense, then we don't deserve the White House.

At the very least I think the American people will make the reasonable conclusion that neither the Democratic or Republican Parties should have complete control, and then vote for a split ticket with McCain winning.

As for myself, I can't vote for McCain. But after watching Hillary and her people these past few months there is no way in hell that I'm casting my vote for her. Hillary is making McCain look emotionally sound.

How would seating half the delegation or giving them half a vote work? Or help? Wouldn't the total needed still be increased, and Obama still take a serious hit?

And how does that work with MI?

Frankly, Obama making some public proposals is what I thought he should do two months ago. Make a reasonable proposal, and make her accept or reject, publicly. It makes her look looney. And craven. And hypocritical.

But I'm unclear how half-ing the delegations cuts into her unfair advantage. Thoughts?

Don't seat them, play by the rules everyone agreed to for once in your life.

It would seem, at best, that the candidate camps would agree to a middle ground.

Clinton wants 100% seated.
Obama wants 50% seated.
Settle on 75% seated.

That would add 235 delegates to the total and make the magic number 2,144.

(The uncommitted MI delegates have already been chosen and from all reports are 95% staunch Obama supporters. Remember that some of those uncommitteds were likely supporting Edwards so it is unreasonable for Obama to insist on 100% of those votes even though he is likely to get all those delegates.)

If Obama cannot agree to that scenario then he is just obstructionist.

Obama campaign advertisement
In the run-up to Super Tuesday on February 5, the Obama campaign ran a nationwide television advertising campaign that was shown in all states, including Florida. Obama's campaign asked for the ads not to be shown in Florida, but were told by the cable networks this was not possible.[17] The campaign then sought and received permission to run the ad from South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler as at that point South Carolina had not already voted.[18] Clinton adviser Harold M. Ickes has claimed that this violated Obama's pledge not to campaign in the state.[

When a Stateswoman speaks I listen. I support this message from Hillary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULxxBz-PAjg

Hillary knows that her getting all the delegates in MI is not reasonable. She is only doing this to keep the goal posts moving as long as she can. Her strategy right now can best be labeled as Anything Can Happen.

Her hope is that something happens to Obama to bring his campaign either to a dead stop, or limping so badly the superdelegates will turn against him.

She will keep doubling down until she is politely escorted out of the casino.

Pledged delegates have little to do with this. What Hillary wants is to have the illegitimate votes to be counted, so she can make her bogus argument about popular vote, and then try to win with the supers. Her ONLY argument now is popular vote, and she can only win that by gaming the system (make Obama go POOF in Michigan, while not including caucus estimates). She sees how weak McCain is and will do anything to get that nomination. Sadly, it won't work.

The same thing was proposed in March and the Obama camp rejected it. They proposed a caucus knowing Hillary would reject that. Then Hillary proposed a mail-in primary and Obama eventually rejected that too. Now Obama is proposing the 1/2 solution he rejected before, and he will find some way to scuttle it again just like he did with the mail-in primary.

Obama doesn't want the voters of Florida represented at the convention, period. But he needs to give the appearance of wanting it. That's all this is.

Hey rstephen,

Could you please respond to my above post?

Isn't this what the Supers were put in place for? What are they waiting for? They need to stand up and act like adults and end this. We need our nominee now for the G.E. It's over. Please show Hillary the door even if you need to call on the bouncers.

That's the response I'm looking for, although I think you've gone a bit overboard that this is all Obama's plan somehow. I have plenty to respond to and I will in time. Thanks for the response, despite the unnecessary vitriol.

rstephen said everything in blockquotes:

TRUTH: Hillary only pledged that she would not campaign in those states before the primary, which she didn't.

The pledge says "campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008..." Clearly she participated and wants the results of her participation counted. She therefore went against the pledge she signed.

Lie #2: Hillary was the only candidate on the ballot in Michigan. Truth: Mike Gravel, Chris Dodd, and Dennis Kusinich were also on the ballot. The reason that Obama took his name off the ballot is because he was going to lose to Hillary Clinton, and he wanted to soften the impact of this defeat for future primaries, and in that sense he was successful.

I realize others were on the ballot in Michigan. That's not the point at all. Their votes shouldn't count either. So Obama took his name off the ballot, not because pledged he would, but because he and his campaign somehow knew that Hillary would be within range of victory only if the votes in Michigan and Florida were counted, even though she said publicly that she realized that they wouldn't be. OK.

LIE #3...The only role that the national Democratic party has is in whether to recognize the results at their national party convention.

Again, you stated the obvious about the State Democratic Party's position on this, the validity of the election that was held, and the role of the DNC. Hillary agreed to all this.

I honestly don't know how to reply to "Lie #4" as I'm not sure what it has to do with the pledge she took. Feel free to expand.

Lie #5: It’s unfair to count those who voted in those two states because many voters didn’t bother to vote, thinking that their vote wouldn’t count. Truth: There were scores of issues and candidates for office on the ballots in both Florida and Michigan, and voting is the patriotic duty of every American citizen...So to penalize and take away the votes of those who did their duty for the sake of those too lazy to do theirs, only highlights the complete moral bankruptcy of their position.

Fine. I agree with you that people who didn't show up to vote on the issues and other candidates are not exercising what I consider to be a responsibility of an American citizen, not simply a right. However, how can any say who the voters preferred when they voted "uncommitted" in Michigan? How can the HRC camp say that none of these should be given to Obama? Do they somehow know that no one in Michigan wanted to vote for Obama?

There's my response to the first five. I need to work a bit before I hit 6-10.

Damn. Botched the blockquotes. Again.

Why did Obama reject a REVOTE?
Isn't that the logical solution?

Why should Clinton give him delegates?
FL did not vote for Obama, even though
he campaigned there illegally.

Sweetie, you need to stop reading hate rhetoric in these blogs.
6 months ago, Obama paid Trolls to purge out all the clinton supporters, and they became nothing but apam. Palms well greased all around.

They want the Michigan "uncommitted" delegates to stay "uncommitted," despite their having previously argued that Obama's campaign drove the uncomitted voters, because the Michigan Democratic Party establishment has already picked delegates on the assumption they would get a full slate and, being the fine, noble small "d" democrats, interested only in the sacred will of the people, that they are, they packed the "uncommitted" delegate slots with Hillary supporters.

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/contributors/1609

Kind of casts some light on some previously mysterious dark corners now, doesn't it?

Sad to see people so young completely indoctrinated.
You have been so brainwashed, you are
EMBRACING corporate dictated news!
You hate a candidate and you do not know
ONE THING about her!

You are no different from Hitler Youth.

I love the irony of all of this. If HRC really believed the votes should count. I mean she has compared it to Zimbabwe afterall, she should have made her stand then. I do think a 1/2 count of pledged delegates would have been the right choice BEFORE the primaries were held.

She also would have won FL and gone into Super Tuesday with the momentum she clearly lacked. A pricinpled stand might have made the difference THEN. But now, well it's just pathetic.

But the reality is she did not make a principled stand then, because she has no princples. She was arrogant, thought it was in the bag and did not care. THEN. She will have the rest of her life to ponder why she failed, and that is a good thing.

Is she gone yet?

No solution will be acceptable to Hillary. She looking for a way to make a stink, not a solution.

Billy Joel was right "Only the Good Die Young".....one has to wonder whether what Progressive voices of reason like Paul Wellstone, RFK, JFK, Jr., MLK, Jr. would say about Hillary Clinton's Campaign tactics. Have the superdelegates no testicles? SHUT THIS CORRUPT EVIL WOMEN DOWN!!! The CLINTONS ARE MORALLY BANKRUPT POWER HUNGRY WHORES who will never ever play by anybody else's rules. It makes me sick to my stomach that Hillary has any shot of being President of the United States and it offends me deeply that this SOCIOPATHIC FRAUD will at a minimum contine to be a Senator from my home state of New York. THE CLINTONS ONLY KNOW BRASS TACTICS. Seriously, it is time to take these people down, head on and expose them worldwide for the corrupt disengenuous frauds that they are. PHUCK YOU HILLARY!!

Suggestion, how about wait until Hillary goes back to the Senate and then impeach her? Is that something we could do?

What Obama are you...chicken?!

I Obama slimes his way as the Democratic nominee and he asks Clinton to be his VP she should take her shoe off and hand it to him and...and...and...tell him to kiss it.