With the likelihood that the nominating process will not produce a candidate with the requisite number of delegates to win the nomination the Democratic infighting over Florida and Michigan has reached new heights. Today’s New York Times details the threats made by several Clinton fundraisers to hold back contributions to the national Democratic party unless the Florida delegation is seated or arrangements made for a new election to give Florida standing at the nominating convention.
Pushing to seat the Florida delegates, at least one top Clinton fund-raiser, Paul Cejas, a Miami businessman who has given the Democratic National Committee $63,500 since 2003, has demanded Democratic officials return his 2007 contribution of $28,500, which they have agreed to do.
“If you’re not going to count my vote, I’m not going to give you my money,” said Mr. Cejas, who was the United States ambassador to Belgium from 1998 to 2001.
Cejas is not the only big fundraiser making noise.
Christopher Korge, a Florida real estate developer who is another top fund-raiser for Mrs. Clinton, held an event last year in his home that brought in about $140,000 for the national party, which was set aside in a special account for the general election battle in Florida. But he told committee officials this week that if Florida’s delegate conundrum was not settled satisfactorily he would be asking for the money back.
“If we do not resolve this issue,” Mr. Korge said, “I think it’s safe to say there will be a request for a return of $140,000.”
With Michigan at least appearing to move towards a new primary there is a lot of frustration building over the inability of Florida Democrats to resolve this issue. Michigan, while still far from solved, is at least moving to a new primary on June 3.
Democratic Party officials in Michigan on Friday proposed a new primary election on June 3 to make up for the January election.
The new vote, which would be run by state elections officials but financed with money raised from private sources, is far from a sure thing. It requires approval by the divided state legislature and from the Clinton and Obama campaigns. There is also no assurance that the party can quickly raise the estimated $10 million it would cost to redo the January contest.
Despite this Michigan movement Clinton and Obama have yet to agree, with Clinton appearing to favor a Michigan re-vote, and Obama holding back.
A person close to the negotiations, who requested anonymity to discuss private talks, said the Clinton campaign was receptive to the June revote plan but the Obama forces were holding back for now.
The person said that Michigan Republicans, who control the State Senate, said they would not stand in the way. But Democrats, who control the state House of Representatives, are divided between Clinton supporters and Obama supporters. “The Clinton people say they’re not going to block it,” the source said. “The question is what the Obama people are going to do.”
And with all of the chaos at the State and local level where is Howard Dean, and how did the DNC allow this fiasco to get to the point it is at today? Dean’s lack of leadership on this has brought disorganization to a new level, high even for Democrats.
The situation in Florida seemed more intractable, with Clinton supporters arguing the party’s prospects in November could be jeopardized if a satisfactory resolution is not found. Some Clinton backers said they were intentionally withholding their contributions to the party, arguing that Howard Dean, the D.N.C.’s chairman, has left the situation in the hands of the states and the candidates, as opposed to exercising leadership to resolve it.
“My wife and I could max out, and we won’t,” said Ira Leesfield, a Miami lawyer who has given $61,500 to the committee since 1997. “We’re dissatisfied with the D.N.C. not taking the bull by the horns.”
The DNC should come out of the ether before this situation creates a no-win scenario for the Democrats in November. And both major candidates ought to stop being so selfish and putting their personal interests ahead of a Democratic victory in November. Its one thing to seek competitive advantage, but quite another to plunge the Party into the abyss if such an advantage is not achievable.
Read the Times story at this link.
Bill Manzi.com 
Your Honor,
This has to be embarassing. They will do anything to win the office of president, including changing the rules.
How can anyone trust a Democrat when they hold no principles as sacred?
Jules
LikeLike
This fighting between our two candidates is absurd. It’s hurting our party, not helping.
LikeLike
I do not want to take it that far Jules, but I am disappointed in the Party for not solving the FLA and Michigan issues as they arose. I understand that neither candidate wants to lose, and that politics can be a contact sport,but the real beneficiary from our disorganization is John McCain.
LikeLike
Your Honor,
This is not disorganization, this about the party of the “villages”, “uniters”, “inclusion” and the defender of the “middle class” exposing a less than honorable side.
You guys have always painted the Republicans as evil and corrupt.
Lots has happened during this nomination process to show the “peoples party” and their journalist allies to be not so superior.
Jules
LikeLike
Your Honor, you hit it right on the money about the leadership issue. Dean needed to come right out and make a statement declaring the parties intentions. In my humble opinion, he should have declared that the rules were stated back when Florida and Michigan decided to hold their primaries early and that the voters there should be venting their rage against the state governments, as opposed to the current state of affairs. If they do go against these rules, the Pubs are going to have a field day with this, and if Clinton wins the nomination because of this, they can really kiss the office goodbye for the next 4 years, since it will really, really tick off the base of younger and black voters Obama has that might not vote at all instead of voting for Clinton.
Hey, you should have a luncheon for all your frequent readers so we can all meet face to face and discuss this stuff.
LikeLike
Mr Mayor,
I note that you state that you are disappointed in the party for not solving the Fla and Mich problems as they arose”. Exactly when would that have been my friend. The Democratic national Committee held hearings across the nation before setting the Rules for the Dem primary and caucus process. Those rules stated that there would be no primary before new Hampshire and no caucus before Iowa. If states choose to not abide or follow those rules the samction was clear..NO DELEGATES! So exactly who caused the problem? Certainly not teh Democratic party of which you are not only a member but also a member of teh Democratic State Committee of Massachusetts. The media has developed a fixation relative to these two ralcitrant and defiant states. Is it because the race is within 100 delegate votes? Is it because so many want an instant winner? The question is whether or not Florida (Republican Gov) will conduct a new election in compliance with teh rules. If not the question becomes one for the Credentials Committee of the August Dem Convention…one could reasonably assume that if Sen Barack Hussein Obama has a majority of votes those delegates ( Clinton’s) would not be credentialed..if Sen Clinton is ahead they will be seated. That is in all likelihood how the “problem”will be solved..and there was nothing Mr Mayor that the “party”could have done to prevent Micjh or Fla from defying the rules.
LikeLike
Exactly when? Right after the States of FLA and Michigan made the determination to flout the timing rules set up by the DNC. Chairman Dean should have gotten off his rear end and mediated the dispute until it was solved. And that is just for starters. Your post reflects in part the reason we are in the position we are in. Party arrogance, the attitude of “we laid out the rules, now you rubes in FLA will not be seated because of your defiance”, just are not helpful in bringing the differing parties towards a solution that helps achieve a DEMOCRATIC VICTORY in November. And the ridiculous notion that whichever candidate holds the most delegates will determine seating of these two critical delegations is nothing short of an outrage. This problem needs to be solved in advance of the convention so as not to make the DNC any more of a laughingstock than it already is. Have we all forgotten the Chicago convention of 1968? In a close race the potential exists to have both delegations decertified on national TV, leaving the States without votes at our convention. A great way to win FLA in the general! Ridiculous. Furthermore counselor the date for the FLA primary was set by a Republican legislature. In effect we have allowed the Republican legislature to create a huge dispute within the Democratic party. How stupid is that? Let me quote from the web site of the FLA Democratic Party.
So counselor, as you can see, DEMOCRATS in FLA were trying to do the right thing. The time for action was back then, and providing strong leadership is up to the Party and its Chairman. Just barking at the “recalcitrant” is not what leadership is about. Citing a rules violation and being satisfied with another Presidential loss but smirking about showing those guys in FLA who the boss is seems to be where the DNC is today. To lose this election would be an outrageous blowing of a huge lead in excitement, money, and participation. And the usage of Barack Obama’s middle name was gratutious.
LikeLike
florida just announced that it will not hold another primary. poor hilary : (
LikeLike
Hmmmmmm. The nasty Republicans are responsible for chaos in the Democratic party?
It only proves one thing, that politicians are idiots; Your and mine.
This is what happens when power and corruption are the overriding rewards of winning.
Welcome aboard gentlemen.
Jules
LikeLike