Why is Obama afraid of having Michigan an Florida re-done?

In Michigan, the way the proposed do-over is structured at the moment heavily favors Clinton. Only people who voted democratic ballots in the first primary will be allowed to vote this time. That rules out the democrats who voted across party lines to try to cripple the republican front-runner. It's generally thought that these were people who wanted to vote for Obama, but couldn't, so they decided to take pot-shots at the republicans. What's left is mostly democrats who supported Clinton. So that means that the deck is stacked in her favor.

At least in Michigan: Prior to the election, ALL the democratic candidates pledged not to have their names on the ballot, nor to campaign in Michigan. It is because the election had been moved to date before the rules of either the Democrates or Republicans allows elections. (Note that the Republican's votes are not being counted either). However Clinton somehow managed to miss the deadline, and failed to have her name removed from the ballot (as all the other candidates did). As a result the ONLY person you could vote for was Clinton. (And she still only got 55% of the votes - the rest were blank.) Obama played by the rules, as did all the other Democratic candidates. Clinton was the only one who broke the agreement by leaving her name on the ballot. She should not be rewarded by given delegates or votes from the election. She took them dishonestly (though legally). The people of Michigan were never given a proper change to vote for a Democratic candidate. If their delegates are given to Clinton it will be wrong. Obama is correct to object to the seating of any delegates based on the crooked election. Should Michigan and Florida have delegates at the election? Yes. In Michigan there is already a process in place to select and send such delegates. Each local precient would select delegates to go to a state convention. At that convention each delegate would declare their preference. Then the convention would select the needed number of delegates to go to the national convention. Normally the number of delegates for each candidate will be based on the number of supporters for the candidate at the state convention. This is a "caucus" process that Michigan used for years until it was recently replaced by an election. Have participation in the process many times, having been a state and once a national delegate since the 80's (Regan era). Although it has been on the Republican side. If the states of Michigan and Florida screwed up their elections - after being warned months in advance - that is not Obama's fault. To seat delegates from an election where the only candidate on the ballot was there dishonestly would be wrong. It does not reflect the wish of the voters. I have no plans to support Obama (or Clinton). Neither should be president. But to dismiss Obama because he played by the rules and is insisting that Clinton do the same and honor her pledge not to take or seat such delegates, is wrong.

Let's be honest for just a moment can we? When you have the lead, you don't want to jeapordise it. The media and Clinton have tried to shove the preacher/race thing down our throats as a mask for our predjudices. I think Obama made a very bold move when he took the issue head on and made a speech that thoroughly covered the subject. He clearly and repeatedly stated he does not hold the preacher's views. Further he stated that he thought they were harmful and worse. Yet, he understands where those views come from and supports the man, but not the views. You should look up that speech on Yahoo or Google. I think you wil find it enlightening.

But in my opininon, Obama has demonstrated a true test of character and for me, has come out with great honor. I sioncerely believe that a person who can listen to those he disagrees with and separate the emotion from the man is a wise person indeed and we sorely need wisdom in Washington. With the current president and McCain, our policy has and will continue to be, beat our enimies into submission. We saw that did not work in Asia. We see that does not work in the Middle East. We need a man who can strongly disagree with the fanatics in the Middle East and even the fantatics in the USA, but still is able to sit down and talk with them with respect for himself, his country and the PERSON, not the ideology, across the table.

THis is how you reach those who don't understand or like you. This is how you change minds. This is how you make real CHANGE happen.

Still the DNC said not move voting dates after a certain dates and yet Fl and MI did so anyway. they did violate that and the Convention has the ability to revoke those delegates.

Hillary only wants the states so she can get a good lead, and while I can't blame her for that I will not accept that she is doing this for "fairness" sake. If Obama had won those she would keep silent about the matter.

I think he's right. She didn't seem to care about their votes until now when she's losing to Obama in delegate count. Had she pushed for a revote or for them to count at that time then maybe she would seem genuine. Anyway it doesn't matter because neither state is going to do it because of cost. Maybe next time those states will follow the rules.

Wow. You clintonistas are really losing it.

Actually, I think he'd win Michigan. It's too bad the Democratic Party is so screwed up that it could not cope with ignored states wanting a bigger voice in the nomination process and thus had to enact draconian measures to punish the uppity members.

It seems so archaic, undemocratic and unable to adapt when compared to how the Republican Party handled it.

As for their names being on the ballot, they had signed a pledge with the DNC to remove their names from the ballot and not campaign in MI and FL. It was too late to remove their names in FL, but not in MI. But Clinton did not remove her name. Why didn't she? Incompetence? Laziness? Dishonesty? It has to be one of the 3! Pick your poison!

Because Hillary will secure the nomination.

You have a warped sense of reality and must be living in a fantasy world. Hillary broke the rules. Obama follwed rules when he took his name off the ballot. Hillary wants to be a rule violater and try to get votes from an unfair and illegal primary/cacus. screw hillary and the b___ granholm for effin up the michigan caucus florida has been effin up elections for the last 8 years. duh is that chad hanging or not? rules are rules and shouldnt be changed in the middle of the game hillary must be a republican in disguise cause republicans like to change the rules in the middle of the game to favor them greedy selves.

What a waste of Money! The dems should have seen this coming!

But it probably would make HRC the Dem candidate.

That is why BH Obama is scared.

Jet

after his newest preacher problem, he would loose big. so he knows hillary will get a huge jump on him.