|
|
Democratic National convention
Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 18:29:36 PM EDT
|
(Good stuff. - promoted by rich)
The complete list of eligible Clinton candidates, 3rd or 4th hand. However, reports indicate that the Clinton campaign rejected 80% of them, so only an unknown 150 are approved.
Second try.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 14878 words in story)
|
|
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 14:20:03 PM EDT
|
|
Earlier this week I was contacted by a woman who introduced herself by saying she had never done anything "activist" before, but after hearing about a protest of the DNC in Florida, had decided to organize one here in Michigan. I'm pasting the flyer for the event below: On January 15, 2008, nearly 600,000 Michigan Democrats went to the polls to make their voices heard in the Democratic Presidential primary. The popular vote in Florida and Michigan has been counted, certified by election officials in each state, and officially tallied by the secretary of state in each state. Our votes cannot be ignored. We will not be disenfranchised. The DNC’s refusal to count our votes and seat our delegates according to the ballots cast on January 15 compromises our civil liberties and our voting rights. This decision affects the rights of ALL Michigan residents regardless of political affiliation. Michigan, let your voice be heard. Join together in a grassroots effort to ensure voting privileges and protect the right to vote for future generations. - Demand that our votes be counted and delegates seated based on the Jan. 15 poll results or that a new Michigan primary take place.
- Demand that the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee take the necessary steps to ensure the voices of the people of Michigan are heard and its delegates are seated at the Democratic convention this summer.
Where: Michigan State Capitol Building, Lansing, Mi.When: Thursday, April 17, 2008 Time: 12:00 PM Michigan matters! Preserve Democracy. Our votes cannot be ignored! For more information go to http://www.hillaryclinton.com/actioncenter/event/view/?id=11862 click on Events, or contact Buffysmomplus3@Gmail.com
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 12:18:42 PM EDT
|
(Big fun! - promoted by Eric B.)
I've spent the past few days trying to track down lists of the Michigan DNC members, state central committee members, and the complete list of qualified delegates that registered for the upcoming district conventions. This information should be readily available on the state party website.
The Washington Post no longer lists the Michigan DNC, as the available information is inaccurate and unconfirmed. For example, the incomplete list at Congresspedia "Superdelegate Transparency Project" currently has Christina Montague listed as a DNC superdelegate: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michigan_2008_presidential_primary_and_superdelegates
According to Sylvia Perkins at Hart-Kennedy House (the state party headquarters), Mark Brewer has decided to prevent publication of these lists. They are only available to the district convention chairs.
Without knowing the PLEO delegates and potentially elected delegates, it is hard to vet and recommend delegates. The actual delegates will remain unknown until we arrive at the conventions, and we'll never know whether any folks were omitted. This allows despotic control by the individual chairs.
Not good for transparency! Not good for democracy!
|
|
Discuss
:: (49
Comments)
|
|
Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 14:15:03 PM EDT
|
|
According to The Politico's Ben Smith, there are 50-60 Michigan and Florida union members picketing at the DNC headquarters. They're complaining that the DNC's refusal to seat Florida and Michigan delagates will prevent dozens of union members who are delegates from attending the convention, and they want DNC Chairman Howard Dean to resolve the dispute. Mike Williams, a Florida union member, compared the DNC's refusal to seat the delegates from those two states as similar to when a comoany locks outs striking union employees. "We're getting locked out," said Williams as he and the other union members pickteted the DNC. Williams estimated that as many as a dozen building trade union members, and 30 union members overall, would be part of the Florida contingent to the Democratic convention
Update: The pickets are members are of the Building and Construction Trades Council, which, to my knowledge, has not yet endorsed a presidential candidate.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 15:28:24 PM EDT
|
|
http://michigandems.com/ LANSING--The Executive Committee of the Michigan Democratic Party issued the following statement today:
The Michigan Democratic Party has carefully reviewed several proposals for a Party-run primary or caucus as a means of resolving the dispute over the seating of the Michigan delegation to the 2008 Democratic National Convention. We have concluded that it is not practical to conduct such a primary or caucus. We will continue to work with the Working Group, the DNC and the candidates to resolve this matter in a manner which is respectful of the views of Democrats in Michigan, and which is fair to those who voted in the January 15th Democratic primary.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 5 words in story)
|
|
Sat Mar 29, 2008 at 14:13:27 PM EDT
|
|
Having taken some time today to actually peruse the "2008 Delegate Selection Rules for the Democratic National Convention" [http://tinyurl.com/2ap8ux], it appears that the rule makers had already prepared for the enventuality of "Violation of timing". The penalty was specified at 20.C.1.a: ... the number of pledged delegates elected in each category allocated to the state pursuant to the Call for the National Convention shall be reduced by fifty (50%) percent, and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by fifty (50%) percent.
My (and others) proposals were anticipated: ... In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation....
Moreover, there's a penalty clause that applies specifically to the Clinton campaign at 20.C.1.b: A presidential candidate who campaigns in a state where the state party is in violation of the timing provisions of these rules, or where a primary or caucus is set by a state’s government on a date that violates the timing provisions of these rules, may not receive pledged delegates or delegate votes from that state.
Therefore, to have any delegates seated at all, we must reallocate our CD convention delegates to be 1/2 of those normally allocated, none are "unpledged", and none are "Clinton". Those are the written requirements to conform to the existing national rules, as of August 19, 2006. We could easily select those delegates at the (now) April 19th conventions.
|
|
Discuss
:: (12
Comments)
|
|
Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:02:15 AM EDT
|
Michigan will hold County/Congressional District conventions on March 29th. That is how the national convention delegates are actually selected. Unless the rules for selecting delegates are changed, the Obama campaign would be foolish to permit them to be seated.
In most CDs, the delegates are evenly split between Clinton and "Uncommitted". Clinton did not win a large enough margin to be allocated an extra delegate in many places.
However, there is no requirement that "Uncommitted" be Obama supporters. It is very likely that the process will be manipulated to include Clinton supporters among the uncommitted. That's one guess as to why the Clinton campaign is suddenly trying to have them seated. It could provide a margin of victory.
The CD organizations are dominated by the congressional officeholder. Dingell, Kildee, and Levin (Sandy) have all endorsed Clinton.
http://superdelegates.org/Category:Delegates_who_endorsed_Hillary_Clinton
|
|
Discuss
:: (34
Comments)
|
|
Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 22:07:59 PM EDT
|
|
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/03/key_dnc_officia.html Unless Florida and Michigan Democrats devise workable plans to redo their outlaw primaries, there is no chance the national party will cave in to pressure and approve their delegates if it could tip the outcome of the Democratic presidential race, a potential key arbiter of the dispute said today. ... In the interview, Roosevelt also said national party officials are resolved to maintain an orderly nominating process. That could be jeopardized if the party backs down against the two scofflaw states. "If there is simply a caving on this, we'll end up with primaries on Halloween and so that does at least counter some of the purely political campaign influences here," said Roosevelt, who is also CEO of the Tufts Health Plan of Massachusetts.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 22:14:37 PM EDT
|
|
At the upcoming County/Congressional District conventions, allow the delegates to (re-)organize themselves. Make them all officially uncommitted. Those delegates could be seated at the national convention, and trusted to vote their conscience. However, no superdelegates from Michigan should be seated, nor should they be permitted to attend the national convention in any capacity. They should not be allowed to be county/state uncommitted delegates. They are the folks that are responsible for flouting the party rules. Penalize them, not the general populace of the State of Michigan.
|
|
Discuss
:: (13
Comments)
|
|
Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 12:42:15 PM EST
|
Hillary Clinton has issued a statement regarding the seating of delegates at the Convention in Denver, saying that Michigan and Florida are an important part of a Democratic victory in November and that she will ask that her Democratic convention seat the delegations from Florida and Michigan.
"I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee.
"I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan. I know not all of my delegates will do so and I fully respect that decision. But I hope to be President of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention.
Sen. Clinton will continue abiding by the four-state pledge and not campaign in states with violating elections.
The Obama campaign is on recording as having said the following:
Our position and the position of the DNC is clear -- neither the Florida nor Michigan primaries are playing any role in deciding the Democratic nominee and we are not campaigning in either state.
And yet, they are airing ads in Florida on cable networks such as CNN and MSNBC, which both illustrates the national scope of the race and the Obama campaign's acknowledgement that Florida is an important race. But the national scope of the race hasn't stopped early state Democratic leaders from protesting Obama's move.
"Words matter, promises matter and pledges matter," said [former Iowa Governor Tom] Vilsack, who ended his own presidential campaign in February 2007 and endorsed Clinton. "It calls into question the promises and pledges he's made on the campaign trail."
The Obama camps decision to air national ads (which include Florida) right before the Primary there is especially interesting because it was the Obama campaign which organized the other campaigns to withdraw their names from Michigan's ballot.
Five individuals connected to five different campaigns have confirmed -- but only under condition of anonymity -- that the situation that developed in connection with the Michigan ballot is not at all as it appears on the surface. The campaign for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, arguably fearing a poor showing in Michigan, reached out to the others with a desire of leaving New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as the only candidate on the ballot. The hope was that such a move would provide one more political obstacle for the Clinton campaign to overcome in Iowa.
According to Grebner's analysis, Hillary Clinton won 73 delegates from Michigan, which she carried with over 55% of the vote.
Sen. Hillary Clinton's full statement below the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (54
Comments, 145 words in story)
|
|
Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 17:12:09 PM EST
|
|
Although respected posters here may say they're voting for Ron Paul or other Republicans...this may not be good. Explanation below.
See the poor man's Michigan Liberal, the New Republic, Angry White Man: The bigoted past of Ron Paul.,
...Martin Luther King Jr. earned special ire from Paul's newsletters, which attacked the civil rights leader frequently, often to justify opposition to the federal holiday named after him. ("What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!" one newsletter complained in 1990. "We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.") In the early 1990s, a newsletter attacked the "X-Rated Martin Luther King" as a "world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours," "seduced underage girls and boys," and "made a pass at" fellow civil rights leader Ralph Abernathy. One newsletter ridiculed black activists who wanted to rename New York City after King, suggesting that "Welfaria," "Zooville," "Rapetown," "Dirtburg," and "Lazyopolis" were better alternatives. The same year, King was described as "a comsymp, if not an actual party member, and the man who replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration."
While bashing King, the newsletters had kind words for the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke. ...
Hillary hasn't been good on MLK issues, but Paul is much worse.
Do you want to vote for Adolf, uh, Ron Paul now? Maybe not. I hope.
There is also the ethical issue about messing with somebody else's primary; I don't really like it, any more than I would appreciate 10 zillion Repubs crossing over and making Mike Gravel the winner. Dems should vote...DEM, etc.
And finally, there is also the "dilution" tactical problem, i.e., one Dem thinks, "I'll vote for that loser Huckabee and he'll win the Michigan vote, haw haw", but another thinks "I'll vote for that loser Ron Paul and he'll win the Michigan vote, haw haw", so that the "loser" votes may be spread out too much and let Romney or McCain slip through anyway--and ALSO let Hillary slip through.
This is what professionals call A Bad Result.
See, too, Daily Kos today, cartwrightdale, Changing my vote from "Ron Paul" to "Uncommitted" (in Michigan),
...I stated a few days ago that Senator Clinton needs to say, on record, unambiguously and as Shermanesque as possible, that she will not challenge the Michigan delegate ban under any circumstances, and not accept delegate votes from Michigan under any circumstances. If she won't commit to this statement, she is patently unqualified to run in the Democratic primary to begin with, as she would be advocating the strategy of stealing an election. I spent the last day or so trying to get an answer from the Clinton campaign, and no one will commit to this statement that I've talked to so far. Which is terrifying.
Therefore, I have changed my mind about the strategic advantage of voting for Ron Paul. It is now the clear strategic advantage, if you're in Michigan, to vote "uncommitted". Voting "uncommitted" in the Democratic primary allows the delegates to be freed up to support who they like, should the convention prove a close one.
Yes, most Michigan Democrats I know still plan on staying home, or voting in the Republican primary, but I hope the word gets out in time that there is a better option. Voting uncommitted isn't the same as not voting -- it's stopping Hillary Clinton from the potential of hijacking an election with invalid delgates (should the final totals be close). And that in and of itself is even more valuable than assuring Ron Paul keeps being a pest.
As for Hillary, by the way: congratulations on her slim 2-point victory over Barack in NH last night, although Barack's 9-point Iowa victory over her was proportionately more impressive.
However, as Maureen Dowd notes in Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House?,
...Gloria Steinem wrote in The Times yesterday that one of the reasons she is supporting Hillary is that she had "no masculinity to prove." But Hillary did feel she needed to prove her masculinity. That was why she voted to enable W. to invade Iraq without even reading the National Intelligence Estimate and backed the White House's bellicosity on Iran. ...
Hillary sounded silly trying to paint Obama as a poetic dreamer and herself as a prodigious doer. "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," she said. Did any living Democrat ever imagine that any other living Democrat would try to win a presidential primary in New Hampshire by comparing herself to L.B.J.? (Who was driven out of politics by Gene McCarthy in New Hampshire.)
Her argument against Obama now boils down to an argument against idealism, which is probably the lowest and most unlikely point to which any Clinton could sink. The people from Hope are arguing against hope. ...
Hope against hope. Heh.
And with Hillary confirming in her victory speech that she'll get us out of Iraq "the right way", it implies she knows better than other Dem candidates what to do there. Which she didn't when she voted to send us to war there, causing far more tears in the families of our dead soldiers than she herself has shed recently; and I don't think she knows better now about Iraq, either. So much for Hillary.
So if you want a viable change candidate like Barack Obama (cf. the other poor man's Mich Lib, the Huffington Post, Obama Wins Key Support Of Nevada's Largest Union today) or John Edwards to win--and no lawsuit knocks over the primary, and if you don't want to boycott the primary, and maybe even if you like Richardson--, vote "uncommitted" and make sure all your friends do, too, and spread the word the best you can. --Kucinich is campaigning here, so he's violating the pledge not to campaign, maybe? and who wants to vote for a dishonest candidate? And Dodd is out. And Gravel...is Gravel, God bless him.
Ironically, then, if you are COMMITTED to change, you may have to vote UNCOMMITTED on 1/15. Funny, I know, but that's life.
Peace.
|
|
Discuss
:: (24
Comments)
|
|
Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 14:40:23 PM EST
|
See AP via DetNews, National convention hotel rooms taken away from Michigan Dems,
Michigan Democrats no longer can count on getting hotel rooms at their national convention in Denver.
The Democratic National Committee's Rules Committee last month stripped Michigan of its 156 national convention delegates as punishment for scheduling an early presidential primary in violation of party rules. State party officials had until Saturday to come up with an alternative to the Jan. 15 contest, but declined to do so.
That decision caused the DNC to informally tell state Democratic Chairman Mark Brewer that the party no longer has reservations at the Red Lion Hotel Denver Central during the Aug. 25-28 convention, state party spokesman Jason Moon said Monday.
"We think that those hotel rooms will be given back to us," Moon added. ...
The Red Lion Denver Central is a 300-room hotel about 15 minutes from downtown Denver. State delegations fight hard to lock up the best hotels with enough room for their delegates, family members and political activists. ...
The primary may still be legal to hold as of today, but somehow, I don't know if all the MDP conventioneers can fit in one cardboard box in the mile-high Denver streets at night, now that their "Red Lion" rooms are gone. Maybe 2 really BIG boxes.
|
|
Discuss
:: (15
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|