Replies

Read the article at post #24. It shows that “both” candidates were both openly and covertly campaigning in both states.

After it was no longer possible for Obama to get back on the ballot in Michigan, Hillary's campaign went to work campaigning there to try and make it seem that she haddn't abandoned them like Obama had, despite them both pledging not to campaign there.

Obama's campaign figured this out a bit slowly and tried to build some support there as well.

Hillary decided not to play by the rules, and Obama did damage control.

But, I’m talking about votes cast and you’re talking about delegates.

Folks can agree all they want to about who gets which delegate, but they cannot pretend that a vote was not cast when it actually was cast.

Well, you can argue that votes were cast, but the rules say those votes are meaningless, so not all the candidates were equally prepared to campaign there, and many voters chose not to vote because they were under the impression that the vote didn't count for anything.

You can guess how things would have turned out had it been a genuine vote that was supposed to count towards choosing the Democratic nominee, but it wasn't so all you are doing is guessing.

The party ruled that the votes didn't count before the primary. You can't change the rules after the fact. If Florida and Michigan want to hold valid presidential primaries, they could do that, but they have chosen not to do so because of the cost. That's their choice. But their invalid primaries shouldn't count.

They were not able to cancel the primary. They were only able to decree their decrees about delegates.

That's a ridicules attempt to create a distinction where there isn't one. As far as the Democratic National Party is concerned those primaries aren't official primaries. Their delegates aren't going to be seated because they weren't chosen according to party rules.

The invalid primaries they held were no more meaningful that a straw poll.