RBC Meeting Live Blog- Thread 2

Hopefully, Gary will look up from his posting and see the comments in the last thread and move over here but feel free to keep us updated in the comments as events proceed.

12:30–The state Dem party of MI is up as challenger. Will outline Mich. proposal. Seat entire 157 delegation at full voting strength. 69 for Clinton 59 for Obama. I hope he explains where that # comes from. Now to the proposal. Should seat entire delegation because MI has been punished enough and further punishment puts MI at risk in GE, and it is a must win. No campaign in MI. They were completely by-passed and that’s enormous punishment. Every time McCain visits MI, they never fail to remind them that Dems don’t care about MI. He wants a waiver, as has been granted to other states. OK, now to the numbers. Says it is fair reflection of voter preference. says actual vote was not a reflection of voter preference? They are arbitrarily picking what they think is fair? (Wow, about half of the crowd has left, what’s that all about?). Why do they want to count voters who didn’t vote?? what kind of banana republic do they want to make of this country? He is arguing that Obama should get delegates from voters who voted against him, that is unacceptable. This crap about proxy votes through uncommitted is BS, and his assertion that Obama’s supporters were urged to vote uncommitted is an admission that he campaigned there isn’t it?

12:40–Did he just say that “WE” urged people to vote uncommitted? Where is the proof that those voters wanted Obama? that’s ridiculous. This is the craziest thing I’ve ever heard. Their interpretation is more fair than the actual vote? What planet is he from? Question from Flournoy: basing 69 -59 on exit polls? use primary, exits and write in votes. Votes cast in primary is that is valid is not enough to allocate delegates. He says there was an incomplete ballot, but Obama voluntarily took his name off the ballot.( the obama supporter who was sitting next to me just moved two seats down to get away from me…how immature, and I am in no way making a scene 🙂 ) Next question: Uncommitted is legitimate, you can’t give those to another candidate. She says they are like SD’s they can make up their own mind. The argument for both FL and MI are weak I think. Like she just said, they want to decide this willy-nilly. This is really troubling. He says that this is a unique situation. circumstantial evidence does not equal real votes in my opinion. We want to replace real votes with exit polls, if that were the case Kerry would be President. Why should we allow bureaucrats determine who won determined on people who weren’t even on the ballot….that doesn’t make sense even in Wonderland. Question: where is the Rule that lets you allocate delegates? No rules apply, but we have to do something…these people are incredible….Ickes: didn’t they withdraw voluntarily? and no party rule required them to do that. The DNC did not exhort them to do that, and the pledge entered into made no mention that they withdraw their names. Was to curry favor in Iowa. applause.

12:55–weak answer. There were no other elections but primary, some local elections. Nothing statewide. He is trying to imply that Hillary was only option so it was not a legitimate election. I can’t believe they are trying to decide elections on suppositions. Again voters who did not vote should be heard!!! Did he just say that some of the voters who voted for Hillary actually wanted to vote for Obama?????????? We are definitely through the looking glass now. Absolutely amazing! The reason we don’t use the same guidelines as you did for affirmative action is because this was an ELECTION!

1:00PM–Carl Levin is up now. How did they achieve unity? And I really hate that they are throwing that out so much, as if Clinton is against unity. Says all parties agree on full seating, but not as the actual election turned out. The only fair way is to use the actual primary results. jeez…. Levin says Obama will argue that primary was flawed. can’t wait for that. Clinton wants to let Obama have uncommitted voters(?) Says not seating full delegation will create disunity. How are they going to give MI full voting rights, but only half to FL? Levin asks: How did we get here? says MI understands primary system is flawed. IA and NH have a privledged position, and that no state should have that. After all that talk of unity he seems to be bashing the DNC and NH. If you give NH a waiver, give MI a waiver. He seems to have gone past his 15 min. sorry had to step out for a sec. Looks like we’re on to questions for Levin.

1:22–OK, time-out I am STARVING he he. Now, lets resume…She says why does it matter if they took their name off if it wasn’t going to matter. But they never said that the delegates couldn’t be restored. Her argument holds no water. How in the heck do you play with the variables? Answer: you don’t. you do what the voters dictated, end of story. As for the write-ins, I say count them. She wants to know how they came up with the numbers 69-59. Why do they keep saying that obama and edwards supporters were not allowed to vote for their candidate? The only person to blame for that are Edwards and Obama. That seems pretty straightforward to me. He keeps saying it was a flawed primary, but it was certified and legal, am I correct? Levin admits, its not fair, it just splits the difference between what Clinton and Obama want. Oh, so now Obama interpreted the rules to mean he had to take his name off the ballot? Worried about precedent of taking votes from Clinton and giving them to Obama. Yeah, that is a bit worrisome if you want a democracy.

1:30pm–Levin responds to the question of precedent. He says it is a compromise. Says he is concerned about precedent, but this is a resolution reached “on the ground”. So his answer is “because it works”? Ickes says uncommitted status is given same rights and status as named candidate. This proposal is undemocratic. gives those uncommitted delegates to one candidate based on exit polls. This is especially bad since they have been so off this season. Those delegates should be fair game. Ickes says it’s stunning that they would take 4 delegates from Clinton and give them to Obama. when he said why not 10 the obots around me applauded (so I guess they approve of stealing) amazing. They are so morally bankrupt it is truly amazing. I have to say, I think this party is F#$#ed. His argument makes no sense. If this was a flawed primary, why is he arguing to seat the delegation. I am truly stunned that Obama’s supporters are applauding the random distribution of votes. These people are not only not Democrats, they are not democratic.

1:45pm–Rep Bonyer (sp?) is speaking for Obama. Obama wants a compromise (your voters votes go to me). Obama supporters seem to hate demcoracy. The Obama supporters here are just as nasty as our trolls. They sneer whenever Hillary’s name is mentioned. All of these argument about uncommitted are meaningless. Again, why did Obama supporters vote for uncommitted, who told them to do that? He wants delegates split evenly, effectively the same as not seating them at all. Again the mysterious voters who didn’t vote should have a voice…(obama’s ghost voters). How ridiculous is that? so he wants a 50/50 split. That’s the Obama idea of compromise. It is clear that they should be split? He is getting lots of boos and hisses. If it was flawed, why not let the delegates make up their own minds? Can you believe they are applauding the disenfranchisement of voters? Wants to reinstate all MI SD’s. Were they for that in FL? I can’t remember.

2:00pm–One thing I’ve noticed. In person, his supporters try to make more noise than their numbers really indicate. A lot like the way the look at voting. They really do believe that some votes are more equal than others. Question: Why take your name of the ballot? Says DC primary “doesn’t count” but people still vote. They want to express their preference. “The voter is the final decision”. The caucus is a flawed process. good point, so don’t the states that have both, shouldn’t the primary act as an “exit poll” to determine delegate allocation? His answer:”We were following the ROOOOLLZZZ!!!!” Oh now he says they had the opportunity to have a caucus but didn’t want to. He just said that not having their name on ballot made the process flawed. So why did he take his name off? Didn’t he contribute to the flawed primary by doing that? “Honor the Vote”. She is right about the uncommited’s too. It really shows how sleazy they are. They want to cheat, they care nothing about fair elections. He wants to respect the integrity of the people who didn’t vote???????? I can’t believe this is what they keep falling back on. What about all those poor 17 y/o’s who wanted so bad to be cool and vote Obama? shouldn’t we count them too? This is ridiculous.

2:10pm–I get the impression that most questions are not buying Obama’s story. But maybe those who are already in the tank are just not bothering to ask questions. The new Obama line “Some imaginary voters are more equal than real flesh and blood voters”. I just noticed that CNN reported that “dozens” of people were protesting. I can attest that as of 8am it was at least several hundred, and I’ve heard accounts here of thousands. Our media is beyond reprehensible. Why not cancel all elections if we are going to just divide everything up afterward without regard to actual votes. Says supports full restoration, unless it hurts them of course…

2:15–Now we have Clinton’s side. Former Gov Blanchard (?) of MI. Strongly urge RBC to make MI count. No dem has won without MI except Carter against native son Ford. MI is reliably democratic. You cannot turn your back on the 600,000 voters of MI. More than voted in NV, IA, NH combined. Says he will campaign for Obama. Says the same of Hillary. We need a nominee of 50 states. Hillary’s people have been by far more well-received in my opinion. Four candidates took their names of the ballot. A knowing, willing, decision. It was a STRATEGY. (called pandering to Iowa). There was a vigorous, organized uncommitted campaign (for Obama). People were publicly urged to do so. Obama, Edwards, and Richardson handed out handbills to do so. Hillary wants 73 Hillary-55 uncommitted.  Hillary didn’t interfere with uncommitted caucuses. You have to honor 600,000 voters of MI.  They should reflect voters’ preference.