Why Michigan and Florida Shouldn’t Count

-Obama will have more delegates and popular vote anyway, so Hillary’s people aren’t accomplishing anything monumental by getting half of the delegates seated or losing anything monumental by not having 100% of the delegates seated. Hillary turned the plight of MI and FL into a reason for her to stay in the campaign, although she herself said “We all know Michigan and Florida aren’t going to count” in October of 2007.

– We can’t devalue the states that DID abide by the rules, because if we do so by allowing all the delegates from MI and FL to be seated, then DNC rules lose their meaning. We then have an even more fractured and divided party.

-You can’t equate the current situation to the 2000 election because the delegates from MI and FL are not going to decide the election. In 2000, the incident in FL decided the election. Adding MI and FL would only give Hillary a nudge up in delegate count, but it is by no means a deciding factor in the election.

-You can’t call an election in which not all the candidates’ names were on the ballot a true election, and to retroactively attempt to account for those who meant to vote for Clinton vs. those who would have voted for Obama is going to lead to more debate and confusion.

-In Florida, voters were told that their votes wouldn’t count. How are we supposed to account for the voters who would have voted had they known that their vote would count vs. those who went ahead and voted anyway? There are 4 million democrats in Florida, and 1.7 million voted. We don’t know how many were deterred from voting.

-While I sympathize with the frustration of the voters who haven’t been counted, I see the overriding necessity of having a party that is united behind its rules and not divided into warring Obama or Clinton factions. As Abraham Lincoln once said, “A house divided cannot stand.”