Ickes: "Difficult" For HRC To Win Pledged Dels Without FL And MI
As plans for a revote in MI appear to be going the way of FL's proposal, Hillary Clinton's team renewed its push for Barack Obama to sign off on a settlement allowing both states' voters to cast ballots.
Harold Ickes was asked by Jeffrey Toobin on today's call with reporters if Clinton would be able to win pledged delegates without MI and FL. Here was his answer:
"I think it will probably be difficult, but that’s not the issue," Ickes said. "The issue is that people keep making this what I consider a phony distinction between pledged delegates and non pledged delegates. A delegate is a delegate is a delegate … I reject the premise of the question."
Ickes, on the call with Phil Singer, said that Obama's campaign is throwing up roadblocks. HRC's lawyers have signed off on the proposals. Ickes said the party is in for a tough road in the general if the voters of FL and MI are not counted.
"It is a politically stupid thing to do," he said.
Ickes also expressed support for a vote-by-mail primary, something that the campaign has resisted to date in favor of a full statewide primary.
"We’re saying that Sen. Obama’s campaign does not want a primary," he said. "Initially, they indicated that they did want one in both states. Now, they’ve changed course. If they wanted a primary his campaign would come out and say so four square."
He also questionned Obama's ability to survive a battering in the general election against the GOP. He said that the "past two weeks" have raised questions about "whether Sen. Obama is going to be able to stand up to the Republican attack machine."
Obama's campaign has remained mum today about the news out of MI, despite repeated requests for comment.
(JENNIFER SKALKA)
I had thought that the Clinton campaign was the first one to try and make distinctions between various categories of delegates, weren't they? I recall even seeing an HRC interview (Newsweek?) where she tried to draw a distinction between "primary delegates" and "caucus delegates".
I agree with Ickes that a delegate is a delegate is a delegate - and someone should tell their candidate that.
"We’re saying that Sen. Obama’s campaign does not want a primary," he said. "Initially, they indicated that they did want one in both states. Now, they’ve changed course. If they wanted a primary his campaign would come out and say so four square.""
-Ummm HRC said she would not recognize those states in November of '07
the "past two weeks" have raised questions about "whether Sen. Obama is going to be able to stand up to the Republican attack machine."
-Ummm he will stand up, and do it eliquently as apposed to bitterness and psychotic attack ads
I didn't mind the Clintons before this primary... now I can honestly proclaim I both fear and dispise them
Vote Obama in '08 and move America forward
This issue of Fl and MI are totally nuts!! I've seen Hillary claiming that the Republicans are the reason that both states lost their delegates by moving up their primary dates. God, when the Clinton's don't get their way, the stomp and cry - lies! Two years ago the DNC met, as they always do prior to an upcoming presidential election and ALL THE STATES agreed to the rules that were established for the running of their primaries. They voted (yea, the American way) and agreed not only to the dates for each state but how they would be run. They also agreed on the "punishment" if any state moved up its primary dates. Both Fl and MI agreed to these "rules." Isn't it time we begin sending the message to our youth that rules are to be followed and yes, I feel for the people of both states, but it was leaders of the party in those states that agreed to move up the primary date - now you got punished! END OF STORY!