Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely

Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

celticlord2112 -> Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/13/2008 3:59:15 PM)
Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely One giant merry-go round: quote: "The best option is whatever we can get the candidates to agree with, which puts a vote back in the hands of the people of Florida and Michigan. And that's going to be not so easy to do," Dean said. Seems reasonable....but then.... quote: Obama told reporters traveling on his campaign plane Thursday that although he has concerns about mail-in voting, "we're going to abide by whatever the DNC decides." So the DNC waits for the candidates, while Obama waits for the DNC.... How is this leadership? Obama wants to be President. Last I checked, Presidents made decisions, took chances, got out in front where the danger is. Instead, we have the "change" candidate hiding behind Howard Dean's skirts. Perversely, if Obama championed a strict adherence to the rules, Michigan and Florida would have their delegations cut in half, and Clinton arguably would lose her Florida delegates because of her appearances in Florida just before the election. He could champion the voters of both states and actually GAIN ground on Clinton. He won't, because he is exactly as Clinton depicted him--all talk, and not much else. When McCain wins in November, the Democrats will have only themselves to blame for losing states like Florida. Edited to add: My main gripe with Obama is that his gutless wonder act on Florida puts me in the position of actually having to agree with Clinton....[:'(]

Alumbrado -> RE: Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/13/2008 4:40:22 PM)
Last I checked, Presidents were supposed to act based upon their authority....what authority gives Obama to power to do as you claim he should?

celticlord2112 -> RE: Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/13/2008 6:48:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Last I checked, Presidents were supposed to act based upon their authority....what authority gives Obama to power to do as you claim he should? He is a candidate running for office. Candidates declare their positions on relevant matters of the day. This day, there are few matters more relevant than the integrity of the electoral process itself. As a candidate, Obama, along with Clinton, is in a position to frame and advance a discussion about whether Florida and Michigan were properly handled or no. So far, Clinton has shown leadership on this particular issue, arguing that either the delegation should be seated (her preference) or the primary should be re-done. One can argue the merits of her position, but there is no denying that she has staked out a position--and that's political leadership. Obama has responded by deferring to the DNC. There are two difficulties with this response: 1) it does not rebut Clinton's position, thus sidestepping a very substantive albeit transient issue; 2) It puts the DNC in the position of having to address Clinton's position, which is a very gray ethical area for the DNC--strictly speaking, the national committee has to stay above the fray and not lean towards one candidate or the other. In the ideal, political contests are contests of ideas. Candidates express their views, champion policies on a variety of subjects, and the winner is the one who makes the most persuasive case. In this particular discussion, Obama should articulate his position on the question of what to do with the Florida and Michigan delegations, thereby allowing the DNC to act in the ethically solid role of mediator, seeking and finding the common ground amenable to both candidates. As many posters here in the forums have demonstrated, there are competing views on what the proper disposition of the Florida and Michigan delegations. I personally would argue for strict enforcement of Rule 20.C.1.A, which is the prescribed penalty for improper timing of a primary or caucus. Others would (and have) stated positions more in line with the DNC's choice to invoke Rules 20.C.5, which allows the Rules and Bylaws Committee to apply additional sanctions as it deems appropriate. If we can have spirited debate on the integrity of the electoral process, what prevents Obama from doing likewise?

Alumbrado -> RE: Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/13/2008 8:04:44 PM)
Because he has already stated his opinion, and backed it up with his actions by not campaiging in those states, which renders playing into the hype about it now, moot. Your definition of 'integrity' seems to have just stretched past the breaking point.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/14/2008 1:58:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Because he has already stated his opinion, and backed it up with his actions by not campaiging in those states, which renders playing into the hype about it now, moot. Your definition of 'integrity' seems to have just stretched past the breaking point. Hogwash. It's not "hype" when the DNC did not enforce the rules equally. Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina also violated the exact same rule which cost Florida and Michigan their delegations--and those states' delegations are at full strength. It's not hype when the DNC went beyond the sanction spelled out in Rule 20.C.1.A--loss of 50% of the pledged delegates and all superdelegates. There are legitimate questions to be asked about why Florida and Michigan lost their delegations in their entirety, when the rules do not automatically call for that sanction. That is not "hype"; that is meaningful political debate. If, like Obama, you would rather the questions not be asked, that is your preference. As you say, Obama has already stated his preference to follow another man's lead. However, if Obama wishes to campaign for my vote, let him answer the questions that I have--such as why does he blindly back an arbitrary, capricious, and withal suspicious decision to disenfranchise voters in two states.

pahunkboy -> RE: Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/14/2008 4:38:09 AM)
the demsare in dis-array- and have been. hillary thinks she is "owed" the prez slot. she isnt. the country will view left no doubt- but how far left?

KenDckey -> RE: Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/14/2008 4:45:47 AM)
I still believe that the Dems are still pulling themselves apart at the seams. They ban states from the process by establishing rules that I feel are not realistic and give preference to other voters. When a candidate decides to play by the rules, the other canidate wants the sham election that they had counted because it counts against him. They want the taxpayers to pay the cost of undoing their mistake. They can't get unified. I think Obama is right in his actions. Just let the DNC sort it out. It was their foulup. Let it go and let them fix it. He isn't in charge of the party.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Fla. Presidential Primary Re-Do Unlikely (3/14/2008 8:11:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey I still believe that the Dems are still pulling themselves apart at the seams. They ban states from the process by establishing rules that I feel are not realistic and give preference to other voters. When a candidate decides to play by the rules, the other canidate wants the sham election that they had counted because it counts against him. They want the taxpayers to pay the cost of undoing their mistake. They can't get unified. I think Obama is right in his actions. Just let the DNC sort it out. It was their foulup. Let it go and let them fix it. He isn't in charge of the party. He is a man who would be President. Everything you say about the Democratic Party and the DNC is true--they do seem to be fracturing. My hope is simply that anyone with the temerity to seek the Presidency would have a bolder stance to his own electoral process than "what he said".

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125