Hi JTs...Oh, I can only wish the problems for democrats this year were as simple as straightening out a kink in an IV line...;-)

Very funny... Again, JTS...I refer you back to 1968 when Hubert H. Humprhey was given the nomination with a sum total of zero primary wins.

And he did compete for the nomination. Yet he won no primaries...and yet he was given the democratic nomination in 1968.

RFK was killed June of '68 and RFK had thus far only won a couple of primaries before he was killed .

RFK also had lost a couple primaries when he was killed. RFK had gotten into the 1968 primary campaign late in fact because McCarthy was running early and he saw how McCarthy had managed a good showing in NH as the anti war candidate against Johnson.

So RFK threw his hat in the race and LBJ suddenly announced in March of '68 he would not seek a new term. HHH was LBJ's VP and ran in the primaries from that point on...

But even though he,Humphrey won no primaries by the time of the nomination and even though McCarthy had and was still vying for the nomination at the Chicago Convention of 1968...the DNC gave it to HHHumprhey.

Fair? Hell no! But they did it and it was within the massive complex of within the DNC web of byzantine "rules'.

But they can do basically whatever they want... it if they want to..because deep in those much vaunted' Rules are Rules', missive there actually are even more rules upon rules and more rules within the bylaws that allow for just about anything. So again going back to the beginning top post..

,,,'The Rules are Rules' argument is specious at best.

There are rules to alter the rules and more rules in the by laws of the DNC "Rules' to give them the ability to alter and change any rules previously made for a myriad of reasons.

The problem for Dean and the DNC is more of an appearance of poltical fairness more than any real reality of fair play.Don't kid yourself about that one.Fair and Legal are two totally separate species when it comes to political chicanery.

So the point is the DNC has one heck of a mess on it's hands this election cycle ..simply put..because we have a very hard felt split between the two factions(HRC and BO supporters) the DNC is this election in avery uenviable postion as to how exactly to re-unite the party whichever candidate eventaully gets the nomination.

And with HRC currently threatening to take this fight all the way to the Convention...really, this could well turn into one of the most tumultuous election seasons, as well.

Right now, it's clear by Dean's TV appearances, he is literally begging the un committed super delegates to get on board with a candidate so he can avoid any showdown with Hillary at the Democratic National Convention.

Who knows?... maybe Obama will run the table now and then there will no question and need for Hillary to fight on, guess time will tell.

Jennifer72:

D) The (completely fair) way it should have been done but probably won't. Super delegates must always vote their conscience (or the whole purpose of them becomes moot). Michigan and Florida get some (though not full) representation.

This mess is partially due to a power fight between the Republican/Democrat parties and the individual state legislatures. The state set the dates of the primaries and caucuses but the national parties want that power for themselves. Instead of battling over it, they need to sit down and come up with a reasonable compromise. Having the primaries and caucuses spread out over six months is dumb. This gives a small number of states the power over everyone choices on Election Day. We all know those small number of states are a poor representation of the diversity of this nation. I think all Primaries and caucuses should be done between April and May of Election year. Spread over just two months keeps half the nation from having useless primaries and caucuses. Best of all we would be saved from having to put up with two long years of political drivel from senators who should be working in Washington not parading the country telling up how good they can work!

You have made my points precisely ,Jennifer and thank you for that.

You understood correctly, how the issue is one between the DNC Nationally and the various state legislatures and heads of the party in each state at issue.....and you rightly refer to the situation as a mess and it is.

And your common sense solution is right on the mark.

i.e...when you write the states in question 'should have a sit down and work it out' ..that is . so exactly true..however...I saw and watched the DNC Committee Hearings on this election cycle on C-span and the fact is they already have. And Donna Brazile told Florida, at least..no dice..no way, no how, would she comprimise with Florida and allow for a do over or any recompense.(the way Brazile talked to the Florida chair people when they came to the DNC for help..is what made me so angry about this whole mess when I saw video of that meeting on C-span)

Now, that was a few months back they can still always try again..with enough poltical pressure...but if Obama wins any more primaries, all bet's are probably off.

Thanks so much for evaluating the issues here, so well and so accurately.

.

MasterJay:

but all you subcscibers to the Dean Brazile plot theory forget a couple of small important details.

The rules were made and broken in January,Obama wasn't running in January.

Brazile is supporting HRC in the election....

And Bosnia is an "implosion" that the Republicans will get more out of than anything else.The implosion is happening to HRC,read the Pa.Polls.

Liars....get caught,this one did,on tape.

Master Jay..Brazile used to work for Bill Clinton when he was president and she was head of the Gore Campaign in 2000....she is not supporting HRC or BO, officially, as she can not officially endorse either because..today she he co chair of the DNC along with Howard Dean

And , yes, it was Dean and Brazile that openly announced that they wanted to front load the primary season this time 'for diversity'...that's why the changes in the primary dates occured..no secret 'plot' about it.

The problem was when they did that and moved Florida and Michigan's dates for their primary they had to know due to each states politcal legislature issues these two states(who just happened to be states likely to go for HRCliton) would be put in the difficult position of not being able to easily adhere to the date changes.

They knew this.

But, HRC was hoping and figuring she could garner the nomination anyway..so she agreed to it.(but she knew by agreeing, if need be, this could always be re-addressed and challeneged legally, should the need arise by a too close to call race)

The bottom line question is this?

Because now we are in a place where this nomination is so close...should the DNC make another adjustment so that Florida and Michigan have some way to be represented and the will of the majority in these states count?

Of course the Obama supporters say no..because they don't want HRC to win.

But at the end of the day..is it really fair...to disallow the will of the majority who voted for her in Florida and Michigan when a primary election cycle is this close?

Especially, when in truth the DNC does have the power(within their bylaws and 'rules") to allow Florida and Michigan to be counted, if they so desire.

Set Mi Free:

Yes Hillary can yet win the nomination...she has to overcome the delegate deficit. She has to win the rest of the contests by over 20 percentage points, she has to somehow convince people that only she deserves to have delegates from Michigan and that the uncommited cannot count towards Obama's total and she has to convince over 60% of the superdelegates to support her. Of course Hillary can win, these are not out of the realm achievements.

Let us do it without trying to change the comitted delegates and also let us do it by accpeting the will of the people as currently stated. Additionally, Hillary has to commit to leave the race if she cannot take the delegate lead after all the contests are done and closed up.

That said......Hillary cannot win.

Again...I refer you back to Humphrey getting the nominination with zero primary wins in 1968.

But I do know, this is a very bitter election cycle..the problem is really that the party is in a serious danger of dividing, no matter what candidate wins.

And McCain is in a good position to win the general by default, due to the infighting between the BO and HRC camps.

That's the real down fall for Dean and Brazile and how they handled and set up the Rules this go 'round.

Really, no matter who gets the nomination now..if McCain wins...Dean and Brazile are through.

God only knows what shape the entire democratic party will be in if we lose this election after 8 years of a failed GOP/Bush Presidency.

Can you even imagine how bad that will be for Dean and Brazile and the DNC, as a Party,to lose to the GOP, after 8 years of George Bush?

But because of the divisions between the two camps..McCain actually has a fair shot at winning.

It's sadly astounding, but true.

..look at the polls.

llcares:

PLEASE, do not predict the outcome of the race for the Democratic Nominee until all of we Americans have had a chance to vote!

thank you...good point.

;-)

Thanks,Lunesta. Much appreciated.

beinformed:

LaurieAnnM:

Will you support Hillary enthusiatically, should she win?

I wonder. But, aside from that question which should be answered in all equity....

I don't think it is incumbant in this country that anyone anyone should be forced or bullied or coerced to vote for anyone.

But thank you for your very interesting reply.

I haven't decided yet who I will vote for. But it is every citizen's right to vote for whomever they choose.

In part it is this bullying attitide of Obama supporters that is also disturbing.

I may vote for a write in candidate. It's every American's personal decision to choose and have a right to choose privately. that's why the voting booth is sacred and secret.

There is actually a law about the right to leep the citizens vote private.

No one can demand you vote for any particular person.

That is against the law.

That is why the caucus results are questionable... Texas precinct caucuses had Clinton supporters assigned to one side of the room and the Obama supporters to the other. All sorts of election laws were violated in TX because they were not prepared to handle the number of people attending.

No one that stands up for democracy would want their candidate to win under those conditions. Obama wants to calim TX, fine, but remember, he outspent HRC there also and she still won the popular vote.

Just think how much it will cost him to beat McCain. People actually like and respect him...

Very cogent points and thanks for the note about the very questionable results of caucuses and the confusion at these various events.

And your last point about McCain is a big problem for us democrats.

One the DNC will ignore at our own peril.

beat you to it, dear. Hopefully she won't exploit you further by putting it up on her hate-filled SMEAR SITE "BLOG." You know, the one, she keeps insisting is not hers. :-) As ever, "L." (a concept she does not understand, sad to say...)

It's just SAD how obsessed Catnapping/katydont/all those other names IS ... kind of pathetic,in a way. She lives to stalk and flame, and that's her problem, far more than it is, mine. As ever, "L." (Think she's up to 12 or 13 CURRENT names, as people keep finding more new ones...) :-)

My pleasure, Laurie. And lots of NEW readers for you, too.

:-) "L."

continues. Pretty sad stuff, cattylin. Such an unhealthy behavior, obsession is.

thx. and if you email with ellen let her know what I told you in email about the mischief maker. Powers that be are aware..so that's good enough. For now just do your best to ignore and hopefully the problem will be up to the staff at Slate to watch and consider.

This really was an enjoyable thread with interesting and civil discussions on the issue that the few poses and silly mischeivous ones(though a bit annoying), are of little consequence to the entire thread as a whole.

Thx again.

in his campaign, at least that are visible. Obama is starting to look like just another Ivy League-educated Good Ole Boy Lawyer to me, frankly. The outspoken, well-educated wife is COVER, imho. I bet he's as sexist as they come -- ever notice how condescending his behavior was towards Sen. Clinton in most of the debates? VISIBLY so.

I beg you to reconsider!
Just this morning I ran across two articles about Sen. McCain in the Huffington Post that cast him in a very bad light, indeed!

<link>
and
<link>

We would not want our president calling Heads of State such as Kim Jong-il, a 'little fag', for instance, would we?

I see that the first link didn't go through, but that is OK, both stories about McCain's outbursts are in the "raw story" link. Before I rushed out this morn. I had jotted them down from what was then two articles about him ... I am veddy sorry for the inconvenience I caused you, Dear Leader.. er, Speaker.