Here's the pledge. Where's your beef?

Judging from the comments the Obama supporters are leaving on TalkLeft, it appears there's a fundamental misunderstanding on what the candidates promised and didn't promise regarding the outcomes of the Florida and Michigan primaries.

Here's the four state pledge (pdf).

It says nothing about which delegates will count or not count in Florida and Michigan. It says nothing about whether a state's primary will count or not.

The candidates merely pledged not to campaign in any states holding a primary or caucus before Super Tuesday, other than Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

The text of the pledge is reprinted below:

Four State Pledge Letter 2008
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina
August 31, 2007

WHEREAS, Over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar;

WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic diversity of our party and our country;

WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process, to insure that money alone will not determine our presidential nominee;

WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the nominating calendar.

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.

Hillary, Obama and Edwards all agreed to the pledge on September 1, 2007.

Now, can people stop saying that Hillary Clinton agreed the votes in Florida or Michigan wouldn't count or to the non-seating of the delegates? It prohibited only campaigning. Even fundraising was allowed.

The exclusion of Michigan and Florida was a penalty imposed by the DNC. In my view, it was an unfair one and should be lifted. The votes should count as is, the delegates should be awarded and seated.

Big Tent Democrat favors a re-vote of some sort. Hillary appears not to be opposed if that is the will of the party. The party appears to be leaning towards a mail-in revote. When will Obama get on board?

Here's a few questions/comments from TalkLeft: 

someone told me recently that SC also changed his primary date to be earlier than usual in January.
But I cannot find the right info. nor do I know if this was so. Do you know?
If this is true (?), could you explain (if you know) what were the considerations for agreeing to SC and not FL ?
Thanks !

[ Reply to This | 1 2 3 4 5  ]

[new] SC and Nevada did move up (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by litigatormom on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:28:20 PM EST

and the DNC decided not to penalize them on the theory that early contests in SC and Nevada would give more African-Americans and Latinos a chance to vote in an early contest, and also begin to break the stranglehold that Iowa and NH have had over the first contests.
Of course, FLA and MI have a lot of Latinos and African-Americans too, so that can't be a complete explanation....

[ Parent | Reply to This | 1 2 3 4 5  ]

[new] That's right (none / 0) (#35)
by Andy08 on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:42:39 PM EST

Thanks litigatormon for confirming SC (and NV you say as well) moved up
their primary.
But as you also say, FL and MI have indeed lots of Latino & AA voters...
FL more than either SC or NV I presume (at least Latinos).

Seems very odd; what could have been the distinction then?...

Gosh .... (keep shaking my head...).

[ Parent | Reply to This | 1 2 3 4 5  ]

[new] And because Harry Reid's son (none / 0) (#53)
by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 11:14:49 PM EST

chairs the Nevada state party, that just may have had some influence with the DNC to give it a bye, too.

[ Parent | Reply to This | 1 2 3 4 5  ]
[new] I believe BTD (none / 0) (#39)
by Joan in VA on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:56:21 PM EST

did a very thorough post about 5 states that were not in compliance on dates and also the rules. Maybe 3 or 4 weeks ago? Anyone else remember?

So why did you not remove your name from Florida ballots? Why does South Carolina and the other 4 states count but Florida and Michigan do not? Why did Barack campaign but claim it fell outside of the guidelines? How did Nevada get past the rules? How does pledging not to campaign mean that the election doesn't count? Why is it not clear that Hillary is way ahead with these two races being counted as they should be? How is a "caucus" or anything like it even legal? Talk about disenfranchising voters.  Also, this is a DEMOCRATIC Primary for the DEMOCRATIC Candidate for President.  Not the Independant Primary or the Republican crossover voter Primary.  I am not either but I am a registered Democrat. She is ahead in pledged delegates, popular vote and Super Delegates just by simply allowing the will of the people and by allowing actual votes to count.  In Wyoming it only takes 800 people to get a pledged delegate.  In California it takes over 12,000 votes to get a pledged delegate. Who is running this clusterfuck? Howard? Donna? Remember when Donna Brazile told Al Gore he didn't need to campaign in his home state and he lost it by 3 points?  Seems like a leadership problem, not a voter problem. One person, one vote! Caucus my ass!Oh, and lest we forget this pledge was authored by the "Four State" panel who want their votes to be more relevant than they actually are.  None of these four states come close to representing any cross section of the American electorate. Why does any state hold more sway? The number of votes Hillary  got in Florida is more than the total vote count of the entire four states that had Primaries prior to Florida. Yes we will seat those delegates. Another election will not be stolen from the American voter.