>
> Ras,
>
> Here is Part I in the chronology of events:
>
>
Edward I really think I have a better understanding than you think.
Here are a few problems with the article that I might clarify:
>"Florida Democrats got a shocking surprise when the DNC's Rules and
Bylaws Committee voted to eliminate not just half their delegation, as
Floridians say the rules specified, but all of it. Ausman said the
committee was bluffing. The DNC "thought they could push the Florida
party off the Jan. 29 primary," forcing the state party to hold an
alternative vote, he said. Then another shock. The DNC hadn't imposed
a campaign boycott, but the Democratic parties of the four states that
had permission to vote early - Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South
Carolina - angry at Florida and Michigan's poaching, demanded a
boycott. The candidates, fearing voter retaliation in crucial early
states, agreed."
Ok first the DNC did go beyond the proscribed rules. It makes no sense
why they would go beyond the AUTOMATIC 1/2 penalty. That penalty is
automatically assessed as to whether the rules and bylaws comittee
takes any action at all. However the same applies to the restriction
on campaigning. That restriction is WRITTEN into the rules. I believe
its 12 c 2b could be off but I think that is right. There is not "they
did not place a restriction"... that restriction exists regardless of
any pledge made. The pledge process was nothing more than a ploy.
Further the co-chairs who voted for the measure for a full penalty are
Clinton supporters. So why would they make such a nonsensical
decision? Could it be because Clintons front running opponent was
SUPPOSED to be Edwards... a southern progressive? Also there was a
feeling of paying back the compromise that led to SC being moved up
which Clinton considered a REAL threat. Imagine what she faced after
NH. Three states... SC (which at the time was supposed to be Edwards
state... followed by Florida and THEN pro labor Michigan).
>U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, a Clinton backer, proposed a
mail-in revote, and major donors are now offering money. But state
party officials said last week that there's not enough public support
for a new vote.>
The revote proposal was never serious and points to why Dena is a
failure. Dena started this by backing the full ban, then he backed off
the position but said the states had to pay for their own revotes,
then he changed it to the campaigns paying for it. Defend that
inconsistency. Or was that forgotten. Further lets look at the Clinton
role, thier campaign was in turmoil so they brought Carvelle in who
said he was willing to pay for a Michigan mail in revote. But surprise
surprise lacked the cash to do it. Of course that did not matter. They
made the headlines and were nimbly able to lay what was once done with
the Clintons campaigns blessing at Baraks door. As if he created this
mess. Her Florida supporters led by Wasserman-Schultz, who would make
a great VP is she wasn't such a damn fine Congresswoman, led the
charge to reopen the Florida wounds... rather than seeking a
compromise did this publicly ... again great press and made it again
look like Obama was behind this mess, or at least that the whole
process was tainted.
Everything was NOT Deans doing. He allowed the Bylaws and Rules
committee to play make up to the Clinton campaign, but it was the
Clinton campaign supporters that pushed for this to level the field if
not hamstring Edwards. Then he allowed the mess to drag on. The fact
is she created this mess now she wants to fix it. Clinton tore this
party in half because she felt she could not loose, then when she
started loosing she had to have outs. This was never supposed to be an
issue because Florida was a write off state. It was not part of the
Democratic plan. They had shifted to a west Midwest strategy.
So yes ED I think I grasp the situation just fine. I think however you
might want to dig a little deeper. "Your" chronology seems to be
lacking a few truths.
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Dems2008-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Dems2008-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Dems2008-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder