![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The chief lawyer for Senator Clinton's campaign submitted this letter to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee. The meat of it is that the Clinton campaign is asking that all of Florida's and Michigan's delegates be seated with full votes, with Obama getting NONE of Michigan's delegates, since no votes were cast for him - and, yanno, since he wasn't even on the ballot and the Michigan Democratic leadership decided a week before the primary to not count write-in votes that is TOTES FAIR TRUFAX! So ... everybody would have their votes represented. Except the people who voted Uncommitted, of course, most of whom were likely Obama/Edwards/Richardson/Biden supporters.
Never mind the fact that Clinton agreed to the rules that the DNC is trying to enforce to begin with. What gets me is this part:
Um, WHAT?! The states have been sufficiently punished just because candidates didn't make campaign stops in those states and didn't have offices there? That has to be the most ridiculous thing I've heard in this primary battle, and I've heard some DOOZIES. Since when is not getting a personal visit from a presidential candidate or having a campaign office in your backyard punishment for anything? I'm in AWE.
I truly feel for the people who went out and voted in Florida and Michigan. I do think their votes should be represented in some way (although I don't see how Michigan's can, since Clinton was basically the only candidate on the ticket). But it's clear from the appearances that officials from these states have made over the past few weeks that their intention in moving their primaries up was because they thought it was unfair that Iowa and New Hampshire got so much cache in the political process from having the first say. But dudes ... if this primary calendar has taught us anything, it's that it ain't over till it's over. And while Iowa's and New Hampshire's opinions were important this go round, no doubt, it was the Clinton campaign's lack of planning for the later states that has at least partly led to her downfall in the nomination process.
One thing's for sure, though, in my mind. If Clinton fights the Committee's decision, especially after Obama reaches whatever new delegate number is required for the nomination, any chance she might have had for a future run will be gone. Fair or not fair, she can't hope to lead a party that is clearly not behind her.
Never mind the fact that Clinton agreed to the rules that the DNC is trying to enforce to begin with. What gets me is this part:
The states have already been punished because no campaign activity was conducted in Florida or Michigan. There is no requirement or need to punish their duly elected delegates who represent the 2.3 million voters in Michigan and Florida who participated in the nominating process.
Um, WHAT?! The states have been sufficiently punished just because candidates didn't make campaign stops in those states and didn't have offices there? That has to be the most ridiculous thing I've heard in this primary battle, and I've heard some DOOZIES. Since when is not getting a personal visit from a presidential candidate or having a campaign office in your backyard punishment for anything? I'm in AWE.
I truly feel for the people who went out and voted in Florida and Michigan. I do think their votes should be represented in some way (although I don't see how Michigan's can, since Clinton was basically the only candidate on the ticket). But it's clear from the appearances that officials from these states have made over the past few weeks that their intention in moving their primaries up was because they thought it was unfair that Iowa and New Hampshire got so much cache in the political process from having the first say. But dudes ... if this primary calendar has taught us anything, it's that it ain't over till it's over. And while Iowa's and New Hampshire's opinions were important this go round, no doubt, it was the Clinton campaign's lack of planning for the later states that has at least partly led to her downfall in the nomination process.
One thing's for sure, though, in my mind. If Clinton fights the Committee's decision, especially after Obama reaches whatever new delegate number is required for the nomination, any chance she might have had for a future run will be gone. Fair or not fair, she can't hope to lead a party that is clearly not behind her.
annoyed
(mystery)
I can't help but wonder at what point Hillary threw away her caution - has she decided that this was her last chance, that there would be no tomorrow, that it was literally all or nothing this time?
(mystery)
I really don't know what her endgame is; I don't think she really has a strategy other than hold on and hope all the supers develop amnesia. After Tuesday is when she needs to gracefully withdraw. I still think she will. If she doesn't, I think she really will find the party turning against her.
(mystery)
Most of all, it makes no sense to count Michigan at all, given the lack of campaigning and Clinton being the only one on the ballot. She's really grasping at straws at this point, and just embarrassing the hell out of herself. It's bad enough that she had no shame when she kept bringing up RFK's assassination, but I don't think she can ever recover from the combination of that and her whinging about Florida and Michigan, plus other things that mean she absolutely can no longer claim that she's the one to beat McCain in November. Perhaps an innate sense of shame should be required to be a politician... she seems to lack this entirely. I used to like her a lot, too, and I'm very disappointed by what a horrible campaigner she's turned out to be.
(mystery)