Hillary campaign insists on changing rules after the fact

You could see this coming from a mile away... Apparently Hillary's campaign learned some lessons (the wrong ones apparently) from the Gore 2000 campaign, most importantly if you are losing and the numbers are against you keep contesting and keep trying to get the rules changed in your favor until the math, hopefully, eventually turns in your favor.

From The Washington Times, by Christina Bellantoni (See complete article by clicking on linked headline below)

Clinton campaign retools delegate math

DURHAM, N.C. — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign yesterday tried to redefine the delegate math for securing the Democratic presidential nomination, signaling its willingness to wage a divisive battle with front-runner Sen. Barack Obama through the summer.

Mr. Obama, meanwhile, questioned Mrs. Clinton's trustworthiness heading into today's primaries in Indiana and North Carolina.

Top Clinton aides said the nominee must win based on a tally that includes delegates from Florida and Michigan, which held January primaries that were disqualified by party rules. The campaign's "Delegate Hub" Web site identifies 2,208 as the total delegates needed to be nominated, or 183 more than the threshold of 2,025 set by the Democratic National Committee's rules.

"That's what we believe is the standard for deciding this — who has the majority of the total delegates including Michigan and Florida to decide the nomination," said Clinton strategist Geoff Garin.

The Obama campaign has long accused Team Clinton of "moving the goal posts" to avoid facing the reality that it is nearly impossible for her to catch up, and his supporters in the Democratic Party's hierarchy reacted angrily yesterday to the idea that the 2,025-delegate finish line could be changed, especially because Mr. Obama is 273 delegates from reaching that magic number according to his campaign count.

Moving the goal posts is about as kind as you could describe this. We could have seen this coming from a mile away as Hillary Clinton's only real chance at winning the nomination revolves around counting the delegates from Michigan and Florida, two states where no delegates were supposed to be counted, and two states where her opponents all obeyed the rules and stayed off the ballots and did no active campaigning.

I would actually love to see Hillary take the Gore approach here and sue the DNC over not counting the votes from Michigan and Florida. That would make for very entertaining theatre.

Referrals: 35

Tags: politics

Comments (16)

Actually according to the DNC rules, they should only lose 50% of the delegates from these states. They were willing to have a revote but Obama protested probably because these are not states he would carry. The fact of the matter is that without Michigan and Florida delegates in play Obama cannot win enough pledged delegates to get the nomination either. That little detail always seems to be missing. If Obama has already sewn up the nomination why is he still campaigning for it. I would think if it was a done deal he would be back in Chicago or DC. The fact remains that Obama is losing support. Hillary is beating him in the polls against McCain and he hasn't won a primary since February. I assume that Hillary will win Indiana but it will be interesting to see how close the North Carolina race is.

Actually according to the DNC rules, they should only lose 50% of the delegates from these states.

Uh, nope. NO DELEGATES are to be seated. Those are the rules that the DNC imposed and which the candidates *all* supported originally or at least didn't protest to the point of having the rules changed.

Yes Obama protested and objected about revoting, because it would cause him to dig into his war chest of funds that would be needed during the general election and because it would make him look bad if a revote was held in states that supposedly had already been won by someone else.

Would Hillary be trying to get these votes counted if the states were Obama states? Hell NO! Would she be trying to get these votes counted if the states were Edwards states? Again, hell no. She left her name on the ballot rather than telling the people in the state to vote for none of the above because she wanted the ace in the hole/back pocket to pull out later and get the delegates from. She wanted to be able to welcome the prodigal states back into the fold at the convention where she could look like a peace maker. Too bad she isn't ahead now and isn't close at all unless those votes are counted, and too bad the majority of the party isn't interested in kowtowing to her whims.

As to your dreams here:

The fact remains that Obama is losing support.

Hmmm, picked up 3 super delegates from Maryland in the last 24 hours. Picked up a former Clinton big-wig over the last week as another super delegate, and looks to clean Hilldog's clock in North Carolina, and oh yeah, won the Guam caucuses.

Losing support? You're dreaming again...

Even better:

ZOGBY: OBAMA UP 14 IN NC; AHEAD 2-POINTS INDIANA...

You both are right. Hillary is trying to change the rules, and Obama does not have it won. Nor will he unless Hillary quits. As it stands now, they are going to a brokered convention. As it should be. Pledged delegates vote for their pledge first round, then are free to vote for whomever after that.

It will be fun to watch.

ZOGBY: OBAMA UP 14 IN NC; AHEAD 2-POINTS INDIANA...

polls ... schmolls - the only ones that count are the ones that show my candidate is up which would be the Gallup/USA Today poll

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/05/AR2008050500815.html

Wow - Obama won guam ... and Michigan and Florida shouldnt' be counted.

Oh and Obama won Guam by like 7 votes and they each got two delegates. Big win, in his column.

Super Tuesday was in MARCH, by the way. Obama certainly HAS won primaries since February.

But like their pied piper, Hillary's followers apparently live in their own dreamworld!

Eh, no matter. Both candidates suck awful and are up against an opponent of equal suckitude in November!

"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. "

From the DNC selection rules. You should also note that Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina also broke the DNC rules but were not punished. The DNC is enforcing the rules arbitrarily and not even according to their own selection rules. Also note that the early primary in Florida was because the Republican Florida legislature passed a law moving the primary date up. Do you think that it's really fair to take away the Florida Dem's votes for that reason?

http://www.seatourdelegates.com/

Super Tuesday was in MARCH, by the way. Obama certainly HAS won primaries since February.

Actually Super Tuesday was February 5. Sorry Gid, you must be living in a dream world.

Actually according to the DNC rules, they should only lose 50% of the delegates from these states.

Untrue, the rules state that is the MINIMUM punishment that can be increased according to the DNC's decision.

They were willing to have a revote but Obama protested probably because these are not states he would carry.

Actually there was NEVER any decision on a revote and the states refused to pay for it.

You should also note that Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina also broke the DNC rules but were not punished.

No you shouldn't note that as its an outright fabrication. The fact is those four states had permission to hold their contests before that date. In fact Florida could have held their contest if they had received permission first, something they refused to ask for.

Also note that the early primary in Florida was because the Republican Florida legislature passed a law moving the primary date up.

Don't forget to note that
a) It was a Democrat who proposed that date that was voted on
b) The Florida Democrats were told by the DNC that if they simply voted against the proposal there would be no punishment if it passed
c) The Florida Democrats refused to oppose it and all but one Democrat voted for that Date.

Do you think that it's really fair to take away the Florida Dem's votes for that reason?

Do you really think your repetition of easily disprovable lies would justify the Florida Dems claiming to decide the DNC's rules?

Actually Super Tuesday was February 5. Sorry Gid, you must be living in a dream world.

Yes you are right on this one. I got the primaries messed up this year.

However, a candidate shouldn't be judged on the sequence of primary victories.

Odd, though, that many in the DNC camp claim that the popular vote should be all important (see Al Gore, circa 2000), yet Obama leads in the popular vote and suddenly it doesn't matter. Or, better yet, they claim that if the DNC operated by Republican rules, Hillary would have already won (see Hillary Clinton, about 2 days ago), yet ignore the fact that their party made the rules. Or, they complain about the disenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida AFTER the fact, yet they weren't working beforehand to get them back on the map.

The rules are, play by the rules. Hillary has confirmed everything I've ever believed about her by whining at every turn. How anyone wants this whiner running the country is beyond me.

(Note: I'm sure Obama would be just as whiny if he were trailing, and I don't like him any better, but Hillary has, in my opinion, shown herself to be one thoroughly classless individual).

However, a candidate shouldn't be judged on the sequence of primary victories.

True! or the president would be elected by Hawaii every year since they vote last.

many in the DNC camp claim that the popular vote should be all important

the two are not even remotely comparable. The popular vote in this contest is exceedingly meaningless seeing as how it disregards any of the caucus states. Its the equivalent of basing 2000 on the overall total vote of 35 of the 50 states.

Welcome to PoliticalMachine.com!

In order to add a reply you need to login or create an account.

'Michigan and Florida must be counted'