Cool.

Fewer Clinton delegates.

Don't bring a knife to a gunfight ...

No revotes does not mean that delegates from the previous election will not be seated, nor that they will not be seated in proportion to the original tally.

Michigan's going to get its shit together right after we leave this hell hole. Mid-May can't come soon enough for me.

Oh, the original FL delegation will wind up being seated. Will in Seattle is just as wrong about this as he was about RTID II being ready by the end of February.

Johnnie @ 2 - I would be extremely surprised to see the delegates awarded according to the actual vote tally. They will probably do something like halve the value of the delegates and split them between the two candidates.

I'm not sayin' I'm fer or agin' a revote, but if the Florida Democrats cannot stage an election--their only basis for existing--eight years after their Y2K debacle, then they should fold up the tent and just walk away. That is pathetic beyond belief.

Again, why should they be seated?

People (mainly Clinton supporters) are stating that "voters are disenfranchised". Well, in most years, I doubt that you could say that the people of North Carolina feel like they make a whole lick of difference in the primaries. Why don't you address that first?

they'll only be seated if they can't make a difference. obama would be insane to allow anything more.

As an Oregon voter, I know how it feels to know that your vote doesn't matter in the primary (Looks like it will this year. Yay!). But I still vote. I am an Obama supporter, so I'd rather ignore states where Clinton "won," but it is absolutely wrong to just tell the voters of two entire states that their votes won't be counted at all. The voters in those states have every right to have their votes count.

Clinton didn't campaign in FL. Obama did. Oh, you can say it was a "national buy", but his ads were on in FL. Hell yes, FL delegates should be seated.

Obama supporters are just playing politics-as-usual on this subject. Which is fine; Clinton is better at politics-as-usual.

"On the Fox News Channel, Gov. Crist once again calls for the party to “do the right thing” and seat the delegation as-is in Denver — voted in by a record-breaking turnout."

Christ's motives are so transparent. he obviously wants Clinton to win. If this doesn't tell you who's the most electable, then I don't know what will

yes to @9. @7 - they should be seated because the deserve representation in the political process. While other states might not feel as important as Iowa or New Hampshire in the primaries, that is not the same as having no representation in the matter, nor the same as (like Obama's camp is pushing) creating results (a 50-50 split) which were never voted on and which never existed.

TCO@11, quick, which is more likely:

(1) Crist is trying to throw the Democratic nomination, or
(2) Crist is pandering to FL voters by sticking up for them in a dispute with a national party (that he hates, by the way)?

Geez, some of you Obama supporters will buy any conspiracy theory that comes your way. Pathetic.

Oh, Sven, you're so funny.

If Clinton is so much better at politics as usual, why is she losing this race? Why doesn't she have as many votes or as many delegates?

@11. Crist may want Clinton to win, but if he also wants to ensure a democratic and representative process, that doesn't seem too bad. What does Obama want? Certainly not a Clinton win, but increasingly, not a democratic accounting for primary votes either.

@4 - it was ready in Feb. But Pierce County sabotaged it.

I said 2008, and as early as Feb.

Try looking on the ST site right now and you'll see me staring back at you, from that place you fear, where you cannot go.

It's time Hils...it really is time to just call it quits and help the new kid in any way you can. This whole time I thought you were gonna be my mom-president, but then you proved that you were really more like my crazy aunt Sue with her drinking problem and a cheesy, philandering husband. So sad. *sigh*

I really look forward to the battle that is playing out in front of us in these coming months. As nicely delineated by kos, this is a very serious contest over the future of the Democratic party. Fifty states or sixteen plus one states? DLC or everybody else? Cave in to Republicans or work with Republicans? Politics as usual or a clean break with the past? Nobody seems to want to fight this civil war, but it needs to be fought so that it will actually make a difference when we take the white house.

@10: "Clinton will travel to raise Florida to raise money, which may be allowed due to a loophole in the agreement not to campaign there."

They both made moves in Florida that skirted the rules, but the pledge was not to the DNC, but to the Super Tuesday states' parties, and it was the DNC that decided not to seat Florida or Michigan's delegates. I don't see why the rules should change now.

I actually think Florida should be punished and disenfranchised (they're incompetent), but I guess that makes me an enemy of democracy.

I say punish the bastards.

The Democratic Party is inept.

They can't blame this one on nader or gay marriage...but somehow I think they will still manage to find someone else to blame for their own mismanagement.

some things never CHANGE.

It's a party election, not a public election. The party can choose whether to accept or reject any votes it wants. Nobody's being disenfranchised, any more than I'm disenfranchised when I can't vote in the Safeway shareholder or Longshoreman's union elections.

Anything can be blamed on Nader - and should be.

Heck, the guy's even older than McCain ... and still running for Pres.

Will in Seattle-

Here's what you said:

they're not delaying it "for another year" unless you call a February 2008 vote "another year"

Blame whoever the fuck you want, Will. You were wrong then and you're wrong now. Your rabidly anti-pragmatic bullshit denied WA $10+B in mass transit, and now it would deny us the White House. No thanks.

It's almost too much for me to handle when Clinton supporters call *others* pathetic. Lovely. That's the Clinton "unity" for you.

Does Hillary still get to add the Florida results on to her popular vote tally?

I think we Dems can pretty much kiss Florida goodbye. I really don't see us winning with all this contraversy surrounding it. Plus a GOP Governor will most certainly do a bit of dirty dealing to put McCain over the top

pox @ 22, Yes, the parties don't have the same responsibility for enfranchisement that the real national elections do. They can disenfranchise whomever they want. However, that does not mean that they should, nor does it mean that denying votes cast in a state primary (and then campaigning to keep these states unrepresented) is democratic in any way. While the process does not have to be democratic, if very well should be.

BTW, I have seen two polls today, one a link off of KOS and the other on Washington Post that show McCain beating both Obama and Hillary in the general election. All this internal bickering clearly is impacting the Dems and our goose may already be cooked

@15

comments like that really make me want to puke. i mean really. was that vote really democratic? you know what i would of done in florida if i knew my vote wouldn't of counted? NOT VOTED! it would of been a waste of my time. how many other people would of liked to of voted but were told that it wouldn't matter? MANY.

it was not a normal vote by any sense, there were rules in place, and the state leaders chose not to follow them. now it obama's fault? not crist that f-ing signed the bill/law/whatever? it was a senator from illinois? pfffffffffFFFFF!

it's like having a teacher tell a class that a test she/he will be giving won't count toward a final grade, show up at will. the students that didn't get the memo show up in such great numbers that the teacher decides, you know what, let's make this one count...the turnout was amazing! sorry...no makeups!

i'm positive it's mostly clinton supporters that justify driving solo in the HOV lane. ONLY CLINTON SUPPORTERS.

i'm done.

Obama was done anyway as soon as his crazy preacher hit the national spotlight.

All that's left is for Clinton to declare victory, so we can all go home.

Florida will go GOP as usual. You guys are in for heartbreak if you really think you will win it in Nov. Neither Clinton or Obama can beat McCain. Try wisely spending the money you're wasting for these primaries. I'm sure the schools in FL, which are undergoing severe cuts could use the money. I'm sure the poor folks who suffered through Katrina could use the money as well. 25% of New Orleans residents are homeless. I guess Pastor Wright was correct about damning America.

pox @ 22 wins.

clintons' skeevy attempts at confusing the issue with "disenfranchisement" are petty and a blatant obfuscation, and she really should be better than that;
if she were Lieberman, sure... but oh wait she is him, in a pantsuit.

@29 - You have a valid point about the Florida and Michigan elections not being the same as in states where delegates were garunteed representation. However, hundreds of thousands of people still voted. I support a revote (Obama and Clinton generally do not), but if that is not possible, is it more or less democratic to allow the votes that were cast to be represented, or to deny them altogehter? I think you know the answer to that.

As an aside, your HOV lane analogy makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

As I said, the details were in place for a Feb 2008 revote of ST2.1 minus the SeaTac to Tacoma section.

But Pierce County sabotaged it.

And ... for that ... they ended up with ... wait for it ... more bus service.

See how that works?

Now, do you want us to kill ST2.1 as well, or will you just STFU and move on?

By all mean, keep blaming Nader...if it makes you feel good while you cry in your beer in the corner of the room because the next Republican administration has been ushered in since you (and yours) like to focus on political personalities instead of the obvious problems that cause the only opposition party in this sinking democracy to lose election after election after election...
and when they do win it is with such small majorities that can't get anything done...blame away..

I love these fake fatalists who basically show up to say "Obama is finished." It must be nice to believe one thing must follow another just because it suits your politics. It's no differnet than the religious nuts who hang out on science blogs so they can dismiss science with pat little statments. If Obama goes down, it will because the full culmination of all these little factors (like the Wright thing), not because of any one cause. These simplistic causalities are absolutely braindead and 100 percent political in nature.

Oh, and johnnie, you're the reason we need vouchers. ...Why would I want my children to be educated by someone who advocates breaking the rules?! As an educator, you should be ashamed. Repent or resign, and stop wasting our tax dollars!

37 = case in point.

Ditto for #30.

While we Dems argue over this stuff and fling insults, McCain has taken the lead over both Obama and Clinton in recent polls: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

This is all directly attributable to the internal squabbles among the Dems. Enough with the petty crap already!! We are on the verge of self-destruction. Think about the war, the economy, Supreme Court Justice appointments.

Mc/C @ 37 - Thanks for remembering a little about my bio, here. I'm finally making a name for myself on slog! However, since you think I should resign, I will have to tell you that I'm actually a pretty big deal educationwise. Way big bumps on AP scores. It's rad.

In regards to breaking the rules - it's true, I have nothing against that, when one is changing the rules for a more equitable system. Maintaining a system for its own sake, especially when it means denying a voice and representation to millions, is not an ethics I would teach my students.

You might want to consider homeschooling.

johnnie@22, I mostly agree. They should encourage as broad participation as possible, to be as democratic as possible.

Whether it was a good thing for the national party to have made the rule that disqualified FL and WI, I don't know enough to say. They did make it, and the state parties broke it, fully aware of the consequences. I think the national party would be justified in ignoring the results of those elections. That doesn't mean I think it would be best, just that it would be justified.

My personal view is that January and February are too early for anybody to be voting in primaries, and a good convention brawl would be very entertaining.

40: Yeah, the Democracts had better get their shit together and quick, or McCain/Crist boy is going to be proven correct. The Democrats have become insanely divisive and are going to be hurting pretty bad when and if the democratic implosion hands the election to the Republicans, especially after the Repubs fucked things up so bad. This election is going to make or break the moderate left. For some leftwing nutcase like me, that could be a good thing. To you moderates, it would be both embarassing and disastrous.

As impossible as it seems, I think a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket is the only way the party is going to get it's shit together.

Now, do you want us to kill ST2.1 as well, or will you just STFU and move on?

No, Will, I just pretty much want to keep pointing out your ignorant, unproductive pompous self-aggrandizing know-it-allism until the end of time.

Do what you want with ST2.1. I live in the 'burbs, and carpool to work, all on the Eastside. I thought a bill that gave everybody something (transit for the city folks, roads for the drivers) was a pretty good deal, especially because it was more transit than roads, but you'd rather wait for the perfect package to come along. And thus you will be waiting- my guess?- 5 years until another package like RTID (only with more roads than transit) gets offered up.

Look, @44, you don't get it.

We can keep killing these projects and making it more feasible for people just to live closer to where they work and keep using the existing ST and Metro systems, if need be.

No skin off my nose.

You want to slow global warming - increase density in cities, not suburbs.

I am all for you realizing that you need our votes from Seattle more than you pretend - and the sooner the better.

But you won't get it by dissing us. We are the majority of votes you need and that will not be changing any time soon.

You want roads? Great - pay for it yourself. But you won't get them from us. Global warming is NOW, not tomorrow.

regionalism for the win. both you guys would ratther be right than actually accomplish anything. even discourse on a forum.

@ 33:
"is it more or less democratic to allow the votes that were cast to be represented, or to deny them altogehter? I think you know the answer to that."

but you should remember that democracy is built upon leaving some people out... Classical Athens was not about including everyone, women and slaves and people who were not "citizens" couldn't vote, and everything turned out alright for them, right?

thats not to say it wasn't better than the monarchy/oligarchy system that came before, but still democracy in action isn't quite the junior high social studies class pablum that many of us were taught.

and just to head off the usual Churchill retort "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

yeah but the elite don't really much like those other forms that are tried from time to time.

so there ya go.

And, in case I wasn't clear, ST will be being built for five years regardless.

pxp@ 47 - Athenian democracy was not the most representative, that's true. Nor was US democracy in 1776. Yet, are these valid reasons for denying people access to the political process? I think not.

BA @ 46 is correct.

@49:
"Yet, are these valid reasons for denying people access to the political process? I think not."

direct democracy then, why not? seems better than electing some pandering ass to represent us, 'cept for the glee/schadenfreude we get when the rub their junk against someone other than their spouse or take bribes or the like.

And, if you want to decrease global warming in suburbs, you have two effective choices, really:

1. reduce land size for houses and lots (density); and/or

2. increase fuel efficiency for vehicles (80 to 100 mpg diesel or plug-in hybrids) from the current 20 mpg average in suburbs (no, not a literal measure, it's a curve over time).

There - are you happy? Now sod off and stop trying to get Seattle to pay for new highways for the suburbs - won't happen.

@51. Agreed.

and tthere are plenty of good arguments against direct democracy like the power of referendum ala tim eyman.

Yeah, bellevue, allowing people direct control over their lives and their government can be messy. They might make the wrong decision. Best to cut it out altogether. Some of us just know what's better for everyone else.

I, for one fear the hordes with their spears and flaming torches of democracy. This condo I live in is not a castle, there are no moats or portcullis' to keep me safe... so I prefer to keep them down through economics.
What? You'd do the same if you were as insecure me.

My point, Will, is that you miscalculated RTID, lied about how easy it would be to get a transit only package built, and no one should trust your opinions regarding Clinton/Obama.

And BOTH Will and Bellevue- please note that I said I was in FAVOR of $10+B in money for transit. Even given that I thought there should also be some smaller amount of money for roads, if you think that isn't at the progressive end of the spectrum for the 2.6m Seattle metro suburbanites (vs the 600k of you in the city), than you are even bigger loons than I suspected.

Oh, and Will? Lena, my talented and precocious 10 year old, heard about your turd-like ad hominem last Friday, and she came up with a portrait of you that I think is so lifelike and captures your joie de vivre that I had to share it with the world. Enjoy.

@30

dear jonnie-

a portion of our democracy was built upon rules. we call those rules laws. governor christ signed a law into effect to move the state's primary. without rules and laws we have anarchy. we can 1) forget the rules that are in play and have TOTAL ANARCHY(!) as you have proposed just to make this a "fair" democracy(?), or we can 2) follow the rules, have our true democracy, and change those rules by passing laws to prevent what has happened from happening again. Florida and Michigan citizens have the power to do that.

listen, i don't like the superdelegate system. i don't think it's good for the party. i want it changed, but I FUCKING CAN'T EXPECT TO DO IT RIGHT NOW! it will have to wait un til the next cycle. i can bitch all i want, but that is the system we have set up in this cycle. dig?

where was this uproar in January when Michigan and Florida passed these laws? were you here bitching? NO. did they do it in secret? NO. was crist doing it to compensate for his tiny penis? YES!

it scares me that you are a "big thing" in education. really.

i'm positive it's mostly clinton supporters that justify driving solo in the HOV lane. ONLY CLINTON SUPPORTERS.

i'm done.

Referendums are fucking retarded. Democracy should be about electing the most capable officials, not giving the masses power over policies they don't understand. Referendums are actually holding this city back.

What's interesting about the United States is that increasingly it fails at both kinds of democracy. The people don't elect capable leaders and when people have power over policy they make poor decisions. It's kind of amazing when you think about it.

Sven, I really don't care how you voted. I just think it's stupid for you and will to pit yourself against one another because of what area you live in and perceived goals of one another.

johnnie, that is the exact problem with government, period. whether it is direct democracy or a republic or a hybrid or a democratic socialist state. that one in the government knows better than the person making a decision about certain issues.

I find it hilarious though that one can defend direct democracy blindly without aknowledging that there are some serious drawbacks to it. such that 50%+1 person get to decide for 50%-1 person. And that anyone who pretends to support freedom would then support the tyranny of the majority simply because "the will of the people is neither right nor wrong, it is the will of the people".

you're suggesting that might in the form of voting makes right. you're suggesting that if the people vote for bread and circuses, that is okay. you're suggesting that there is no point to constitutional law because the will of the people is law. you'd support the electorate to cede power to a dictator if 50%+1 voted for it. direct democracy has it's place but it certainly isn't anywhere and everywhere.

anyone that pretends to support freedom and then the tyranny of the majority because the will of the people is amoral is no friend to freedom.

cochise @ 59, that's a very Hobbesian view of law and justice (as the law is the basis of justice, there is no such thing as an unjust law). However, the primacy of the law is not where I find the basis of my ethics - there are such things as unjust laws (though these are insider agreements, not laws) and any decision that would deny people who have a legitmate claim in political representation their right to such is unjust. Yes, there should have been more fuss about Michigan and Florida earlier on, but regardless of which candidate you support, if you believe in democracy, political participation and represenation, then the principaled argument is for either a legitmate revote or seating delegates as currently elected - not for denying representation, regardless of rules.

If total anarchy is the best solution, consider me a total anarchist.

blahblah ave. Other people's ignorance about how to successfully plan for their financial future isn't my fault.

and i dont own a condo ;)

Yeah, the voters of the Wiemar Republic had no problem voting themselves powerless. Lest people think that that's an exaggeration, almost every referendum, and most initiatives I see coming out of the western states that have referendums are completely, with a few scant exceptions, counter-productive at best, mind blowingly retarded at worst.

Voters don't know what's best for themselves, which is why there needs to be voter education/required critical thinking classes before we begin promoting direct democracy, and why the best system so far would entail electing capable leaders who can appoint the right experts to generate policy. The tragedy is that the people can't even seem to do this. But I have faith that people can be educated and improved.

I thing transit and transportation should be debated by traspo experts, and transparently for the benefit of the people. I'm all for direct democracy, but the public needs to be more educated and more critical beforehand. Otherwise, you have idiots voting, and no one wants that.

Bellevue, that is entirely not what I am suggesting. That people should have a right to participation in their governmental process, that more participation is better and allowing delegates in a primary contest to be seated does not mean denying human rights or the right to minority representation (democracy does not also neccessarily equal winner take all American representation, which is *not* 50%+1, but one more than the second). It does, however, suggest not denying people the ability to have their votes counted.

For examples, look into voter initiatives and referendums in Arizona, Nevada and California.

That should be Weimar Republic btw.

"Yeah, bellevue, allowing people direct control over their lives and their government can be messy. They might make the wrong decision. Best to cut it out altogether. Some of us just know what's better for everyone else."

That was your reply to my statement that there are good arguments against direct democracy. how could I not run with that to mean something more than what you clarified?

I dont think voter disenfranchisement is a good thing when it comes to democratic elections that decide government positions.

I think it is unfortunate that the delegates wont be seated but on the other hand how does one address the incentive to stop people from violating the party rules? this is a party election, remember, so the party gets to decided consequences and all. and I do think there should be voter backlash in FL and MI, not only against the DNC but also against the local asshats that overwhelmingly supported it. and if there isn't then the populations of MI and FL get what they deserve.

Bellevue, the question seems somewhat simple: Do you support the primacy of party rules over the responsibility a party holds to represent the will of interested voters, or do you support the right of participation over party rules (particularly over banal election0-date rules that are set by state legistlatures and not state parties)? The question seems simple and obvious to me.

I sincerely hope that this primary will be over some time before Inauguration Day.

that seems like a referendum on voting for the democratic party depending on what they do with FL and MI. I dont think the party has any obligation to seat said delegates and I believe the rules of the party take precedent. At the peril of the party.

is a party that holds their rules above participation worth voting for?