Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Joyner Makes the Clinton Florida Case

INSIDE THE RULES AND BYLAWS COMMITTEE MEETING -- Florida State Sen. Arthenia Joyner, speaking on behalf of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), made an emotional appeal to the Rules and Bylaws Committee to seat the Sunshine State's delegates.

While Jon Ausman, another Floridian who brought the challenge to the committee, made an intellectual case for the seating of all 23 superdelegates and half of the state's 185 pledged delegates, Joyner's remarks were all heart.

"Today I am here fighting for the right of Florida Democrats to have their voices heard," she said at the start of her remarks.

"Right now, as it applies to Florida, we are missing the people," Joyner said later to loud applause.

Joyner also repeatedly referenced the 2000 election fight in Florida when making the case for counting the votes of Florida Democratic primary participants. She argued that in an attempt to pass a bill through the legislature that would establish a "verifiable paper trail" -- a reaction to the 2000 election -- was the same bill that moved the primary up and set up the state for its eventual sanctions.

"Never again did we want the people of the state of Florida and of this country to endure another 2000 debacle," Joyner said. "The price we paid for trying to protect our voters is that we were told our vote wouldn't count."

"In life you don't get everything you want but I want it all," said Joyner when asked whether she was pushing for half or full inclusion of Florida's delegates.

When Joyner finished her remarks, she was greeted with loud applause and a scattered standing ovation.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 31, 2008; 12:00 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Nelson Fights for Florida
Next: Wexler: The Rules are the Rules


This must be a hard time for Clinton, and so she lost to Barack Obama, as many predicted. But hopefully, she could become the next vice president of USA!

Posted by: Brian Zhan | June 8, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

As a past County Clerk and Exofficio Register of Deeds and Chief Elections Official for my county, I am appalled about this "resolution" by the Rules committee. First, a vote, when cast and the canvasing board gives final approval to the number of votes cast and signs off on the abstract -- thats the vote count, period. You can't give votes to those who did not get them on the ballot. The intent is also very important, but if anyone wanted votes out of Michigan, then they should have left their name on the ballot. One vote is one vote. You can't just divide votes in half if the official vote was placed on the official ballot as one vote. I reocgnize that the primary is a partisan election, and therefore DNC gives guidance to presidential elections. The DNC can't override states rights when it comes to federal election laws. Florida's legislature choose to put the date on the calendar, then that was legislated. The DNC really at that point has no right to penalize anyone. All this has done is made a mess of this election, cheated Senator Clinton out of her full delegates; left Senator Obama without his, and perhaps even influenced the votes Senator Edwards received. If there were oddities in elections I conducted, I made them do it over. That was the only way to make them fair.

So, in retrospect the ones who really got hurt the most, was Senator Clinton and the American public. A vote cast is a vote cast that should be honored that way, regardless of politics! I appreciate everyone's concern.

Also, we should do away with caucuses. They are not particularly fair either because of undue influence on the individuals voting, and it doesn't give a total number for election officials, even though officials are suppose to keep a full register and have each name signed in.

Just my thoughts....

Thank you for reading.

Posted by: Linda | June 1, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

The democrats must unite for the sake of the nation. We must not be fearful of leading as a party whether it be hrc or bo. It is our duty as a party to do what is best for all citizens. We must put away fighting and bickering and get down to the task of leading this nation. If there be those who continue to fight and to divide the party, than they should be replaced with those who are to contrary to that attitude and will seek to unite us as a whole.

Posted by: adayah | June 1, 2008 5:30 AM | Report abuse

As a proud Florida Democrat I casted my vote on Jan 29 for Senator Clinton. I feel that this whole thing has hurt the democrats chances of winning this state in the fall.

Posted by: Ricky | May 31, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

McCain will be the next President. Watch Obmama sell himself by narrative thinking which is why he was able to draw the crowd. His true identity of self both personal and professional(which has already started-gaffes) will unfold in the coming elections. An experience he will not forget in his lifetime. The attack on his wife was just tip of the ice-berg. Hillary has been tested through her professional and personal life and have shown grace under pressure. Yes..Courage! She should appeal. Lets take it to DENVER. It ain't over until the woman in the pants suit says so.

Posted by: Ula Nejad- CA | May 31, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

As a foriegner looking on I find this entire process highly entertaining and amusing. I agree with Hillary....'reward all who breaks rules". " It not how you play the game but ensuure you win" Fine example for the young!

Posted by: Bigben | May 31, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

You're wrong, Jaxon1. Obama's in BIG trouble. He may have wrapped up the nomination with the Rules Committee decision today, but those morons on the Committe just tossed the Hillary people out the window. Mike is correct that Obama is toast without them...a lot of them are clearly going to defect to McCain. I listed to the arguments in the hearing today. The Hillary people were FURIOUS. You could hear calls of "Pigs" and "you just blew the election".

Wake up, Obama junkies. Your poster-boy is in BIG trouble.

Posted by: Bob | May 31, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Well, the inept Rules Committee may have just blown the election. They managed to piss off the Hillary people there big-time....people they NEED.

This is not a laughing matter. Hillary's supporters are can take that to the bank. And many of them are going to either sit out the election or defect to McCain. Obama is simply NOT going to win in November without them.

McCain is is probably bringing out the champagne tonight for some celebration.

Posted by: Mike | May 31, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

GIVE IT UP, Clinton!!! My God girl, are you the ONLY one that doesn't see the writing on the wall? Are your staff so far up your arse that they cannot see the light of day?

When I hear feminist moan and complain of "sexism", etc., ad naseum, what I see is exactly what it is you're doing. You lost and can't accept it. You insist on stacking the deck. You make excuses and obfuscate. Typical feminist rhetoric.

Review how Richardson & Edwards handled the obvious. Perhaps you should take note, understand this is politics and not everybody is in love with you & your paradigm as you are.

I am a democrat and I'm have about had it with you and your spoiled, grade school behavior. Buck up, girl. This is the big leagues, now.

Posted by: Jaxon1 | May 31, 2008 8:14 PM | Report abuse


You have no automatic voting rights in a primary. Please look up the difference between a general election and a party primary before showing your ignorance.

You have not been disenfranchised. Saying it over and over when the law clearly doesn't support you doesn't change the law.

Posted by: Lawdude | May 31, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

BTW, let me make this clear.

The Florida Democratic Party has been fighting the DNC decision to strip us of our delegates SINCE THIS BEGAN. This has been going on for over 6 months with lawsuits and other actions. They do so on the voters behalf since we have assuaging them with angry phone calls and e-mails. Do NOT forget the elected officials SERVE THE VOTERS, NOT the other way around.

Posted by: Nexxus7 | May 31, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse


I am a Florida voter who voted for Clinton. I demand my vote be counted in full. Like most FL voters, I was not able to attend the protest since like most FL voters I have a job and responsibilities which do not allow me to uproot and jump on a plane. Any way I wish all of us could have been there and I appreciate the efforts of others on my behalf.

Rules are meant to be broken if they serve to screw over voters. Every vote must be counted OR ELSE...imagine the repercussions. Obama has already damaged his image severely by thwarting the voters. I beleive Obama has already lost by his own actions.

Thank you Sen. Joyner and Sen. Bill Nelson for speaking up for us. We will not settle for anything but full recognition of our voters by the inept and bias DNC.


Posted by: Nexxus7 | May 31, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Let's be clear, this has nothing to do with the will of the voters. This has everything to do with HRC clinging to a race she has already lost. And it wasn't because she is a woman. It's because she poorly managed her campaign and resources.

Posted by: Gigi | May 31, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

marke stickle, ignoranat butthead.
why dont' read the article !

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

The Obama rep wants Clinton to not be able to pick her own delegates if she gets awarded half. It wants OBAMA to have right of approval of CLINTON'S delegates. Why? Because Obama just doesn't have enough busy-work to do lately? Or to screen out old Jewish women?

God, the Obama rep is being sarcastic & smartass now, and made a FL rep angry. It's like the Rev. Wright meeting with the Nat'l Press Club... Obama partisans hooting, clapping and stomping in the background and egging on the rhetoric.

Posted by: AsperGirl | May 31, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Joyner is making that tired argument that the votes of those who chose not to vote, because they were counting on their state not succeeding in seating their delegates (opting out out of laziness, cynicism?), should let the national party discount the value of the votes of people who did turn out.

Posted by: AsperGirl | May 31, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

I don't get it. Even if you give Clinton a split based on Fl votes and the MI delegates SHE STILL LOSES.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

How cynical is it to want to seat HALF of the pledged delegates and ALL the superdelegates?

The Obama representative to the meeting is arguing that "no one was upset when you stripped Florida of all its delegates" and then went on to argue they will be happy with whatever is done.

The panel questioner asked, "So you would not oppose full votes, full delegates."

He stopped and choked and said, "I've already answered the question" while people hooted at him.

What a bunch of phonies and blowhards.

Posted by: AsperGirl | May 31, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Joyner made a huge tactical error when she admitted that if the parties had been allowed to campaign, the turnout would have been HIGHER.

It undercuts her argument that it was a fair election, and shows that the election as it occurred was flawed.

Posted by: BlueDem | May 31, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse


He really did.


That would have been good.

These are the Words of Wisdom.


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 31, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse


He really did.


That would have been good.

These are the Words of Wisdom.


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 31, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

"The Obama rep wants Clinton to not be able to pick her own delegates if she gets awarded half. It wants OBAMA to have right of approval of CLINTON'S delegates. Why? Because Obama just doesn't have enough busy-work to do lately? Or to screen out old Jewish women?"

Wexler didn't say that. Right now some other party slated the delegates, and neither Clinton or Obama have a right of refusal. He wants the right of refusal for both candidates.

And yes, Joyner made an impassioned plea and referred to history, but Wexler mentioned facts while also making an impassioned plea. That's why there were hardly any questions for Joyner...she said nothing to question. I was looking for an argument.

Right now, the only dispute looks to be the superdelegates...Ausman wants 100%, Obama wants 50%. I go with Obama here...why should SDs get more voice than the people?

Posted by: Ken | May 31, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

look at chrissie.
he says the girl made an arguement about heart, while the man presented an intelletual arguement.

but when you read what they actually said, it's the Woman who made the intectual historical arguement and the boy who went all emotional.

nice sexism chrissie.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I'm a very active Florida Dem, worked for more than a month as a volunteer lawyer on several of the high profile 2000 cases, and I think I have a good idea about what typical FlaDems think about the issue.

What the hell is the fuss all about?

I suspect that 99 percent of Dems or independent Floridians could give a damn about whether Florida "delegates" get to party in Denver and wear silly hats on the convention floor.

This seems to be an issue created largely if not entirely by the media (or pollsters when they ask questions like: "do you think it is fair that Florida gets screwed when it comes to selecting the Dem nominee?)

Posted by: Florida | May 31, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Aretha is warming up.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 31, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Give me a break, this isn't about enfranchising Florida voters, this is a cynical back door attempt to hand the dishonest and self-serving Hillary Clinton a nomination she hasn't earned.

Posted by: RealChoices | May 31, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

They should have thought about their voters when they decided not to play by the rules. We are circulating a petition here in Ohio to move the primary up to November of the year before the election

Posted by: Mark Stickle | May 31, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company