Neutral

Poor Hillary, she just doesn't understand how divided she continues to make the Dem party. If the shoe was on the other foot, I'm pretty sure it would be different right about now. She seems to think that being in the White House is a given, not knowing that it doesn't work that way. She doesn't like the idea of being beaten by Mr. Obama, this makes her very unhappy. When she thought she had wrapped up the nomination in January she was thrilled, but when Mr. Obama came back and beat her, she was on TV crying, feeling sorry for herself. She is showhing double standards right now. The best thing for her to do is bow out gracefully and try and in four years.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

I will not vote for some one to be president that can not or refused to obey their own party rules.Mrs Clinton needs to removed her rose color glasses and step to the side.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

FC

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

It's obvious Hillary is not going to win, and of course she knows it, but with all the money she has put into this campaign she is not going to just stop. I too would go to the end. Most women or let me speak for myself don't just give up that easy. But has anybody took notice...Her previous campaign manager Kiki or whatever her name was is no longer in the picture and I have not seen Ted or Tim, what ever his name is in the picture either for the last week or so. So to sum it up let home girl continue to wear her pant suits and keep getting her hair high lighted. She'll be alright in the end. And NO I would not put her on the ticket!

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

Florida I wish you would have stayed within the guidelines.... But no, you had to disobey the rules and regulations... Therefore, you ignored them now you must be ignored.....

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

This is all a trip you have Hillary trying to sound tough and Mccain trying to sound like his reading a bed time story. I know I'm not the only one that has picked up on this. If this 72 year old man win we as a nation can hang it up. The time is over for the US being the bully of the world wanting to control everything.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

Hey, I live in South Florida. Face it our local folks messed up again. There was no reason to move the vote up. We broke the rules, so now it's time to pay the price. Don't be upset with the DNC or the GOP. Hilary, Obama and McClain didn't do this. Call you state legislators, better yet vote them out to office.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

The time has come for a new source of power to take over, and a lot of americans are supporting him. People need to realize that maybe now is the time for a change to come. Give the man a chance. He definately can't do any worse than what Bush has done. Only the Lord knows how well this man will do, and he's not telling.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

According to the DNC website , 2025 delegate votes are required for a given presidential candidate towin their candidacy. This number does not include delegates from Florida and Michigan, the delegations of which were reduced by 100% by action of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, pursuant to the Party’s Delegate Selection Rules, because the State Parties in these states submitted plans for holding binding events prior to the earliest date allowed (February 5th, with the exception of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina ) by the Rules.
What happened to get Florida, Michigan, the DNC, Senators Clinton and Obama to this point of contention?
Check out the Timeline:
August 19, 2006 Delegate Selection Rules adopted by the DNC,
December 2, 2006 Regulations for the Convention adopted by the Rules and Bylaws Committee
Prior to August 25, 2007 Florida's Republican governor and Republican controlled legislature enact a state law moving the primaries to January 29th. The Florida DNC chose to comply.
August 25, 2007 DNC gives Florida thirty days to submit a new plan for a Primary or Caucus or lose all of its delegates to the nominating convention, as a direct result of the adoption of a resolution from committee person Ralph Dawson from NY to strip FL of all of its delegates and Presidential candidates that campaign in a state in violation would lose any delegates they win in that state. But committee co-chairman Jim Roosevelt said after the vote that in this case, there would be “no sanction on the campaigns since there would be no delegates at stake. In adopting the harsh penalties, the rules committee appeared to be sending a message to other state parties and legislatures such as Michigan, that any moves ahead of the Feb. 5 window would be met with stiff penalties and little to no leniency.
November 19, 2007 Michigan Appeals Primary Date Decision To State Supreme Court. The state's attorney general asked the state supreme court to let the state, for heaven's sake, keep its Jan. 15 primary law. A lower-court judge invalidated the primary because the state parties wouldn't have share information about who voted and in what primary. Republican legislators seem more willing than Democratic legislators to try their hand at a new law. Why? Democrats, in particular, worry that the elections will be used to collect signatures for recall petitions in light of the state's historic tax hike. If, say, 2 million Michiganders show up on Jan. 15, it'll be much easier to collect recall signatures by district. Once the petititon is initiated, the collectors need 10,000 signatures per district and have 90 days to complete the task. So this was all about local state politics versus the Presidential primary.
December 1, 2007 Democratic leaders voted to strip Michigan of all its delegates to the national convention next year as punishment for scheduling an early presidential primary in violation of party rules. Candidates signed a pledge stating that they would not campaign or spend money in Florida or Michigan because the DNC rules were broken. Four candidates removed their names from Michigan and Florida ballots a fifth did not do so by the deadline. Michigan Democrats moved their state's primary date to January in an effort to increase the state's influence in the nominee selection process, arguing Iowa and New Hampshire unfairly dominate the process. Obama's campaign chose not to place his name on the Michigan ballot so as not to violate national Democratic Party rules.
Democrats in Michigan were told that they could not write in votes for candidates whose names were not on the ballot, but they could vote uncommitted if they were voting for Senator Obama or other candidates. Radio and other media was paid for by Michigan Congressman and Councilwoman Conyers, in an attempt to get people to vote regardless, even if they voted uncommitted. If at least 15 percent of the people vote "uncommitted," the state Democratic Party must send that percentage of delegates to the national convention uncommitted. Forty percent of the votes received were uncommitted.
My conclusion: In spite of allegations to the contrary, Senator Obama had nothing to do with the exclusion of Florida and Michigan delegates. This insidious mess was created by the DNC, although the Republicans of Florida, and both the Democrats and Republicans in office or on committee in MIchigan got their hands dirty in creating this problem for the true victims: the actual voters. It would appear to me that the DNC need only create a new plan for the future that would hold the state primaries by quadrant regions , and each schedule each quadrant by lottery. In other words, pick number 1 - 4 out of a bag. How hard could that be? And then no one state would matter over another. Equal opportunity with no more of this nonsense. That said, I would encourage the DNC -- because this is, after all, their responsibility to resolve, no matter who is to blame, -- to seat fifty percent of the "committed delegates" from both Michigan and Florida and split those delegates between Senators Obama and Clinton AND then seat all of the "uncommitted delegates" from both Michigan and Florida (if there were any uncommitted in Florida) and let them decide who to cast their votes for. And add those delegate numbers to the delegate vote requirement. No one will see this as being fair, but everyone will grudgingly agree that this is right.

Reply to this Comment | Report This