Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Carville's sports analogy doesn't hold water!
I just sat here and watched James Carville on CNN laboring in an attempt to use sports as an analogy for Florida and Michigan not getting re-do's of their primaries - saying that you don't end a game with 4 minutes left on the clock just because one team is losing.
But if we're going to use sports analogies, let's be fair and perfectly clear here!
There are TWO reasons while Carville's little analogy doesn't fly.
1) In every sport there are PENALTIES! If one team breaks a rule, they ARE penalized. This isn't arbitrary. They are penalized EVERY time they are caught breaking a rule.
Voters in Florida and Michigan elected their lawmakers, and those lawmakers KNOWING broke the DNC party rules regarding primary dates. To clarify some confusion - contrary to what the Clinton camp and main stream media have spun, these lawmakers were FULLY AWARE that their actions would strip these states of their delegates and chose to vote to move their primaries up in spite of the ramifications.
Not ONLY were these state lawmakers FULLY AWARE of the consequences of their actions, the lawmakers in Florida voted almost UNANIMOUSLY (118 to 0 in their house, and in their senate only 2 lawmakers voted against it) and the lawmakers in Michigan overwhelmingly voted in favor of moving up their primary 5 days AFTER Florida was officially stripped of it's delegates for defying the party's rules! THEY KNEW FULL WELL WHAT THEY WERE DOING - AND DID IT ANYWAY!
Hillary Clinton signed the DNC pledge to punish these states in accordance with the rules Florida and Michigan chose to break. She even reaffirmed this pledge on public radio. It wasn't until AFTER she realized that she'd lost the nomination that she became impassioned about this issue.
2) NO SPORT CHANGES THE RULES OF A GAME AFTER THE GAME'S BEGUN AND IS STILL BEING PLAYED! PERIOD!
Carville's little analogy did much to point out that he, too, is willing to say and do ANYTHING to get this thing to work out the way the Clinton's think it should... but if this WERE football, they'd all have been thrown out of the game for "unsportsmanlike conduct" or "unnecessary roughness" long ago.
Comments (6)
If you want to stick to the rules, here is the rule: 20.C1(a) In the event the delegate selection plan, of a state party provides or permits a meeting, caucus, convention or primary which constitutes the first determining stage in the presidential nominating provess to be held prior to or after the dates for the state as provided in Rule 11 of these rules or in the event a state holds such a meeting, caucus or convention or primary prior to or after such dates the number of pledged delegates shall be reduced by fifty (50) percent and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by 50%. In addition none of the mem,bers of the democratic national committees and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to rule 8.A from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state delegation..
Now that is the rule - the delegates are reduced by 50%. So why did the committee reduce the presence to 100%?
March 24, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe because they felt the movement by Florida was particularly flagrant.
But - don't forget there were several Hillary friends on that rules committee that decided to strip the Delegates. It was done by committee - not just one or two people.
Further - Florida and Michigan were given second chances to amend their schedules, and they told the DNC to shove. Maybe those actions are being considered additionally offensive.
In either case, the decision to strip them was made. Clinton didn't say a damn thing until S Carolina. We didn't hear much from the states themselves until her fomenting stuff.
Your argument is fallacious at best.
The final actions were voted on and approved - Hillary decided she is above rules and moved to have them trashed. How despicable?
Piddling with the machinations that occurred before the final vote of the DNC committee are frankly, pointless.
Finally - I would be surprised if your point wasn't made in the losing lawsuits that were filed too.
So, unless you know a lot more than the Courts and the DNC, I guess we have to accept that one side lost. Rightfully so - might I add.
March 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just wonder when someone in the MSM (or anywhere) will mention the disenfranchisement of 48 states and several territories that followed the rules, should the Florida/Michigan delegations be allowed full credentials.
March 24, 2008 9:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, only states that Clinton won can truly be disenfranchised so you have to factor that in.
March 24, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar... Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.
hillary signed this pledge.
period.
March 25, 2008 7:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
furthermore:
Each of the states permitted by the 2008 rules to hold events prior to February 5, 2008 — Iowa (caucuses), Nevada (cauc uses), New Hampshire (primary) and South Carolina (primary) — have submitted to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee a plan for holding its event on the date prescribed by the DNC rules. And, with one exception, no other state has submitted a plan providing for the holding of its primary or caucus on any date prior to February 5, 2008. Indeed, in a number of states, party leaders and legislators expressed a desire to hold events earlier than in the past, but in all of those cases, save one, legislatures moving the dates of state primaries moved them to a date on or after February 5 – in compliance with DNC rules.
The one exception was Florida, where the legislature passed, and the Governor signed, a
law providing for a binding presidential preference primary to take place on January 29, 2008.
The state party submitted to the DNC a delegate selection plan providing for the use of that
primary to allocate delegates to the Convention, in violation of the DNC rules.
Under the DNC delegate selection rules, if a state party’s plan violates the rule with respect to timing, the number of its pledged delegates—those delegates awarded proportionally to candidates based on the primary or caucus results—is automatically reduced 50% (without any action by the RBC or DNC); no member of the DNC can attend the Convention as a delegate; no Member of Congress can attend the Convention as a delegate; and if applicable, the state’s Democratic governor can not attend the Convention as a delegate. In addition, any presidential candidate who campaigns in the state for the event in violation of the rules cannot receive any pledged delegates from that state. In addition to these automatic sanctions, the DNC RBC has authority under the rules to impose additional sanctions, including further reductions in the state’s delegation.
At its meeting on August 25, 2007, the DNC RBC found Florida’s plan in noncompliance with the DNC rules, and voted to increase the sanctions against Florida by reducing the state’s delegation by 100% unless the state party, within the 30-day period allowed by the Committee’s regulations, submitted a plan for an alternative, state party-run process on or after February 5 that would be used to allocate delegate positions.
To date, the DNC’s efforts to enforce the rules have been, except as to Florida, successful
in preventing other states from scheduling events prior to February 5 in violation of the rules,
thereby preserving the calendar as adopted by the Party, maintaining order in the primary and
DNC Written Testimony to Senate Rules Committee on S. 1905 Page 5 Democratic Party Headquarters
this action was upheld by the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION on november 19, 2007 - and the state lawmakers THEN proceeded to fiddle away months before attempting IN EARNEST to propose a viable compromise - at which point, florida lawmakers determined that no plan that could insure the vote against tampering and fraud was found feasible within the time frame that remained. Lawmakers in michigan also concluded that re-dos were not feasible and voted against further efforts.
the bottom line is both states' lawmakers allowed this and a fully responsible for their delegates not being seated.
it's sad for the people in these states, that their legislators played such monumental games with their votes... but it was absolutely necessary that the DNC enforce their rules to ensure that future primary processes are not thrown into chaos, and the courts agree.
these states chose to push their luck and lost.
the still sanctions in this case guarantee that DNC rules WILL be taken seriously in the future.
March 25, 2008 8:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment