Well, according to earlier posts from a well informed resident of Michigan, in THAT case, it was state legislators in conjuction with the Governor, and had something to do with some MI legislation that they were attempting to attach. (Jackpine Savage can explain it better).

According to Conservative Yankee, (who keeps up with these things better than anybody else I’ve come across here) the Florida primary date was set by the REPUBLICANS!! (so in that case…a cabal of party officials would be the right answer - I guess)

I don’t think the candidates or their handlers had anything at all to do with it.

Now I can’t remember if I saved the very detailed explanation from Jackpine Savage, of what the deal was in Michigan, but it was in response to the obvious question..WHY DID MI SCHEDULE THEIR PRIMARY EARLY TO BEGIN WITH? What did they hope to gain from violating the laws? And, why did they not re-consider after they were informed that they would be stipped of their delegates?

As an aside..for those who may not know, or even have thought to wonder, the republicans did this same thing to their own MI delegates for the same reasons, but they didn’t strip them of all the delegates, only half of them. I don’t know what the repugs did with their FL delegates, since they were the ones who scheduled it early to begin with.

Now how confusing is that?

Cyrena, you are following a new trend I’ve noticed among Obama supporters: blame Hillary supporters for “hate stuff”. Geez, can you be more conspicuous in your defensiveness? I’m not saying that ALL Clinton supporters have been as sweet as gradma at a sunday tea, but nobody - and I mean NOBODY - has ever been on the receiving end of hateful diatribes WITHIN THE SAME PARTY as Hillary. To point the finger at Hillary supporters as if they are introducing a new level of putrid into the debate is laughable. Especially since the post you’re commenting on barely mentions Obama and is comparitively light-handed in its criticism. If you think that’s “hatin’” then you’ve been asleep for the past 6 months (in which case you’re a mighty prolific commentator in your sleep).

If you think Obama left his name off the ballot in Michigan purely out of a sense of duty to the DNC, to borrow Jackpine’s line, I have a bridge to sell you. I don’t think it was anything so nefarious as Laura Nason painted it, but it wasn’t as innocent as you make it either. It was a political calculation, which Obama does just like Clinton does. I hope to hell Obama is politically smart, because if he isn’t, NONE of the hope and change he’s campaigning on stands a chance.

Laura,

Somebody might actually pay attention to you here, if the clear and present danger of your Hillary Hysteria weren’t so apparent. That’s how your candidate lost to begin with. You all cannot suppress your anti-Obama ideology or the hate stuff.

Besides, we already knew this…(the others on the MI ballot), but it didn’t matter, since Dennis Kucinich had long since dropped out, (he wasn’t ‘dismissed’) and Dennis Kucinich was the ONLY one of the Dems who did NOT sign the agreement that the other candidates signed, agreeing not to campaign in MI or Florida. It also didn’t matter because the voters in both states (as well as their party leaders, including all of the candidates) were perfectly well aware of this arrangement long before they held the primaries anyway. In other words, they KNEW that their votes would not be recognized, long before they went to the polls.

As for who’s to blame, we already knew that as well. A very politically informed resident of Michigan, (Jackpine Savage) has already given us the rundown on exactly how this all came about in MI, (so I won’t repeat it here), but the short of it makes the MI LOCAL politicians responsible for THEIR bad judgment in ignoring the rules, and hardly the leadership of the Political Party. Aegrus has explained how it happened in FL. Conservative Yankee has also just answered your question on FL as well. The Republican Party set the date for the FL primaries.

Your claim that Obama ‘deliberately’ left his name off the ballot in MI for some “nefarious” reasons is the dead give-away to your Hillary Hysteria. Is that the same reason that neither Edwards, Richardson, nor Dodd, were on the ballot either? Or, could it be that they TOO, had signed the agreement not to participate in that primary, (remember, all but Kucinich signed the agreement) and so their names were never printed on the ballot, just like Obama’s name wasn’t?

And speaking of that SAME MI ballot, were you aware that it included the instruction that any ‘write-ins’ on that ballot would automatically INVALIDATE the entire ballot, and so anyone not voting for Kucinich, Hillary, or Gravel, HAD to vote as ‘uncommitted’. (which was kind of an oxymoron anyway, since they already knew that the delegates would not be counted anyway).

So ya wanna blame the “Party Leaders?” That’s probably a good place to start, as long as you’re clear that the “Party Leaders” who decided this in MI at least, were the Governor of that state, (a Hillary supporter) and a few other locals…of that state. And then of course one of the other “Party Leaders” –Senator Clinton- had no problems at all with those voters being left out of the primaries, as long as she was the ‘presumptive nominee’. (She didn’t need those votes back then when she signed that agreement) As for Nancy Pelosi, she may indeed be worthless and should be removed from her position, but she didn’t have anything to do with this particular debacle. You can blame her for some other things though. But, not to worry. We DO plan to remove her, and quicker than any formal impeachment process can do it. So just leave that to your fellow citizens here in California. I guess we have to take responsibility for that disaster, but hey..who knew?  Like I said, not to worry…we’ll replace her as soon as we can.

Besides, you’ve got larger concerns. You have to get over the drama of your candidate losing the nomination that she felt so sure was guaranteed, that she didn’t care about the voters in MI or FL.

“..I just don’t think the junta went to all this trouble to create a dictatorship just to let it slip through their fingers when a demoncrap gets elected by some accident…”

SamSneddegar…

I understand your point here, and others have said the same. (that they won’t leave).

But…they may….leave that it. If we look at history, they ALL eventually leave when they are run out. There actually is a lot of history to use for the possible outcomes.

Most totalitarian regimes don’t actually groom successors, though certainly there is an exception here, because Jeb is a real possibility. But, things have soured with between Dick and the Bushes, and this is actually Dick’s junta. He took it over.

Besides that, history provides (from Hitler to Pinochet) that most are eventually run out anyway.  though admittedly some have remained for decades. (and many still do, but they have never been democracies to begin with, nor have they ever established what have been open societies).

Still, at this level or ‘brand’ of authoritarianism, it generally is not sustained, because they don’t trust even each other long enough to accomplish that. So, if not run out, (or taken over by another coup) they eventually self-implode.

Besides even that, we have to consider that they haven’t really allowed anything to ‘slip through their fingers’ at least not at the core of the movement. Cheney has amassed an overwhelming wealth, and can now disappear into the sunset, and even work strings from beyond. Same with the others. Even from the level of the kleptocracy, there is little left to steal from US, and they’ve already moved on. (Dubai?)

So, while I’m certainly not making any predictions here, I will say that I think Cheney is certainly smart enough to take his riches and run, and aside from Jeb, the rest of the Bush Dynasty has run its course as well. George is not, and has never been, smart enough to manage this on his own.

i hope this isn’t too off-topic, but since Conservative Yankee mentioned that he thinks Colorado might go blue in November — a position i share — i thought i should share the following development:

Anti-Abortion Measure Makes Ballot
by: Haners
Thu May 29, 2008 at 12:01:33 PM MDT

This development will ensure that the issue of abortion is well debated in this state, and will be a good measurement as to the underlining political views of the state.

Here is the language of the ballot initiative according to the Gazette article:

PERSONHOOD AMENDMENT

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution defining the term “person” to include any human being from the moment of fertilization as “person” as used in those provisions of the Colorado constitution relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process of law?

This could help drive conservative voter turn out despite an underwhelming enthusiasm for John McCain. Not to mention a whole host of lawsuits by fetuses and a whole new genre of daytime television-commercial lawyers.

More on this issue at the Denver Post:
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_9153861

Back on topic: Fl and MI rule! They totally deserve to be the center of attention and to be the deciding factor in a primary season in which the other states and territories predictably followed the rules laid out by the DNC. How boring! But since i’m from a caucus state, which i’m told is just as corrupt a system for nomination as is an election where campaigning is prohibited, what do i know?

I believe that they were approved to be early primaries, so no violation of the party rules had been committed. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s how I recall the situation.

I think there is a compromise, mill. Have the delegation from both states seated, allow them to make their case with whatever side they take but don’t give them a vote in the final say.

Seems fair enough. They get to go to the convention and the original pledge is still upheld.

I don’t have a tinfoil hat, but you apparently are wearing tinfoil blinders. The electoral college argument for Hillary is nonsense, nonsense, nonsense.

The clear-cut winner does not step aside for the also-ran. Get that through your head!

“And if it really must punish somebody, perhaps it should inflict the party’s wrath on the Florida and Michigan party bigwigs—now known as superdelegates—who created this mess in the first place.”

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying for months. We need to get better representation in both states because this short-sightedness is not the fault of either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. It’s a little unfair to project reprimand onto Howard Dean, though, because he had stated weeks ago that he did plan on seating the delegates from BOTH states. The only question is the implication.

There WILL be a compromise. Stop worrying.

The Bush Administration is truly notorious for ignoring or changing rules it doesn’t like without legal authority to do so.

Hate to see the Dems set rules for themselves, then have 2 important states insist on violating them, then have the candidate who would benefit by counting their non-election results somehow keep bleating like a sheep until someone caves into her demands

Reminds me too much of Dick Cheney and John Yoo.

If Michigan and Florida want to seat delegates, they should run primaries or caucuses that involve open campaigning by all the candidates, and accurate vote counting.  Both states could do that still.

at this point ANY delegate who is recognized at the convention in Denver from MI or FLA was not properly credentialed by a real primary or caucus election.  They do not deserve to sit next to the delegates my state send, who earned their way there because they stuck to party and state election rules.

There IS NO reasonable compromise that can make the current illegitimate results from those two states legitimate.

anyone who AGREED with the position taken by “punishing” FL and MI, i.e. disenfranchising their voters, doesn’t deserve to be President of the USA, and of course neither of them will. Hillary might have won an election against McCain (as a squeaker), but poor Obama likely won’t get more than fifty electoral votes, maybe no more than twenty, maybe none.

All of the above assumes that Bush will leave office; I doubt that he will . . . except via a handing down of the puppetry when Cheney quits and Bush names his successor, likely to be Jeb. After that, Bush can retire or be murdered, whichever suits the hidden puppeteers.

Get your tinfoil hats here? I just don’t think the junta went to all this trouble to create a dictatorship just to let it slip through their fingers when a demoncrap gets elected by some accident.

Scratch US off- ours was contaminated the minute the ‘leading’ Dems intentionally threw this Primary with the date change. Then set ballots up to be read by pre programmed SCAMtrons to read every top spot mark as a vote for Hillary-regardless of the fact other candidates names were in that spot! Media did their part with the Mantra “Clinton the only Dem on the ballot”(some would whisper “leading”)leading to a Voter Suppression for any other candidate. Come On she took this UNION BLOODED State by 55%? This State with numerous Metropolitan Cities- Bullshit!
She does not deserve ONE delegate, it was handed to her on a Silver Platter, Not by US but by her Friends like Levin and Granholm et al.
If She is allowed to Steal Delegates, Is placed On ANY Ballot as the or EVEN as a VP I will NEVER VOTE DEM AGAIN_EVER!!!!!And as for OUR Public Servants in Blue- You are SOOO GONE!!!!

^ this stuff up.  Sure as hell, the dems are going to blow a race that Elmer Fudd could have won.  The dems are so embroiled in delusional minutiae they have lost the force for the trees.  When the process becomes so complicated the average voter cannot understand it; then its time to go back to basics.  God help us; here comes the McCain express.

What they should really be discussing is how to hold their little nomination campaigns without making me foot the frickin’ bill for them. 

At least we won’t have to hear so much about this, and that’s a blessing.  (I mean after one side gets done complaining that it wasn’t fair for whatever reason and the other side finishes complaining that its all misogyny.)

And, yes, the superdelegates should be stripped of their votes…fat chance that, punishing the bigwigs who made these decisions.

Good points, but I’m confused on how NH and SC screwed up. EJ says they had their contests early and weren’t punished.