AMERICAblog: Why hasn't superdelegate David Hardt endorsed Obama yet?
interlude
· 1 year ago
is this groundhog day? i thought we dealt with this yesterday? does he read this blog, you think? since his BF is a Clintonista, he probably has forgotten how to do math.
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Or maybe we have a reason we're bringing this up again, and we're simply not telling you.
interlude
· 1 year ago
well, i trust your judgment. it just looks odd.
BorninUSA
· 1 year ago
OT McOld is on TV speaking now. I never thought anyone could be a poorer speaker than Bush, but they found one. Lord help us if we should have to listen to McOld make speeches very many times.
shrrrr
· 1 year ago
BorninUSA, try yelling at the teevee. It does help.
JMOHR
· 1 year ago
Where is the post on the King George speech in Israel. This was the ultimate example of politicizing both the office of the president and foreign policy.
michaelt
· 1 year ago
bush is doing all the heavy lifting for democrats now.
BorninUSA
· 1 year ago
Watched the older version of The Manchurrian Candidate this weekend. McOld has that same vacant look, the same robotic-like speaking voice. Scary.
starrpower
· 1 year ago
I wrote to him and here is his answer to me: Thank you for your email. I appreciate your dedication to the Democratic Party.
The bylaws of the Young Democrats of America do not allow me to officially endorse a candidate in a Democratic Primary race. As such, I am a Proud Democrat and I will happily work my hardest for either Hillary or Obama, whomever wins the nomination of our Party because they are both good Democrats.
Kind Regards,
David Hardt
mistert
· 1 year ago
In the last thread some people were implying these were dumb rules. Well, go to your state party website and you will see that nearly every single state party has a similar rule in effect. Basically - Democratic Party Leaders are not allowed to endorse in a contested primary. There is good reason for this ... they need to keep the party together as everyone is fighting for their candidate.
Why hasn't Howard Dean endorsed? I know YDA isn't the same level of importance, but the same concept remains. David needs to stay neutral here.
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
That's interesting, since his coworker superdelegate at YDA, Crystal Strait just endorsed Obama, and since the two Superds from College Democrats, the sister group of YDA, have also endorsed. And, YDA's third superdelegate, from Puerto Rico, endorsed Hillary months ago. http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=242... But somehow David is the only one not permitted to endorse. Very interesting.
starrpower
· 1 year ago
I could reply to his personal email and ask him. Let me know
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Sure, ask him. The other two superDs endorsed, why do the rules just apply to him? Sounds fishy to me.
starrpower
· 1 year ago
I sent it off so we'll see what he says.
starrpower
· 1 year ago
Here is his response:
Hi Lois,
Thanks for the question, yes, they broke the rules to endorse. As a result they are probably both going to face a hearing on their actions for breaking the rules. I don't have anything to do with that, and it's entirely up to our national body to determine what happens.
But both of them are also proud Democrats and will work for either Democrat who wins our Party's nomination. And I believe that our National Body will cut them some slack for breaking the rules. After all, we are not Democrats fighting republicans, these are two incredible Democrats who want to represent our Party's best interest and our Party will unite behind either Hillary or Obama after one of them clinches the nomination. And those who don't support our nominee, whomever it may be, probably weren't real Democrats in the first place. So, I have every bit of faith, our Party will unite, and we will win in November.
Kind Regards,
David
Kirkland
· 1 year ago
The YDA officers who endorsed are facing impeachment. Obviously, you don't care if David Hardt gets thrown out of office, but those of us who know the great job David is doing, and the important work he has played at building up the Democratic vote in Dallas County and Texas -- we do care.
So throw a tantrum daily on your website. It's kind of pathetic, but if there's nothing else to report, I guess you can slag on David Hardt for following the rules....
... while at the same time rightfully hitting Clinton for trying to change the rules...
Hey, wait, that's contradictory!
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Again, just curious why YDA's other two superdelegate leaders have already endorsed, but David can't. Don't the bylaws apply to everyone? Now that's contradictory. Either they all can't, or they all can. So what's up with David? Something going on that we don't know about?
Kirkland
· 1 year ago
The other YDA superdelegates are facing internal judicial action, including possible removal from office, at the next YDA meeting because of their violation of YDA's rules.
Kirkland
· 1 year ago
YDA BYLAWS ARTICLE XII GENERAL PROVISIONS:
SECTION 1205 Endorsements. It shall be the policy of the Young Democrats of America National Officers, National Committee, Convention, Committees, Regional Caucuses and Caucuses, not to provide official endorsements to any candidate in a contested primary election. Unit and local organizations are not bound by this policy, but are urged to carefully consider to possible organizational risks of such an endorsement.
How dare David Hardt follow YDA's rules!
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Too bad you're not responding to the facts in question, Kirkland. How did YDA's other two superdelegates endorse already if David can't?
Kirkland
· 1 year ago
They did it in violation of the rules, which you obviously don't care about, and there will potentially be severe repercussions for them at the next YDA meeting.
Obama supporters (and I am one) rightly condemn Hillary Clinton for trying to change or ignore the rules to advantage her failing campaign.
Why are you now asking David Hardt to ignore the rules of the organization he was elected -- with 93% of the vote -- to lead? That's hypocritical.
David Hardt is right to abide by the rules of YDA. The other YDA superdelegates are wrong to have broken them.
Clearly, you're somewhat obsessed with trying to force David to act here. But what does he gain by acting, if it could cost him his position and, in turn, his vote at the Convention? What does Obama gain? It's not like Clinton's going to drop out because David Hardt comes out for Obama in mid-May as opposed to mid-June.
It's not an issue of can't. It's an issue of won't -- David Hardt won't break the rules of YDA, because he was elected to uphold those rules. That other elected officers haven't followed the rules is not an argument for David to abrogate his duties as president of YDA and violate the rules of the organization he leads.
WADem
· 1 year ago
John (Aravosis), I think you're kind of full of crap here. Some other poster (can't remember who; think it's funny, btw, that "poster" now means, at least in this context, "one that posts" and not "big picture of Farah Fawcett") has exposed your hypocrisy about this and s/he's right. If the YDA's rules expressly forbid the kid from endorsing, then he shouldn't do it. It doesn't matter that the other three have endorsed--they broke the YDA's rules in doing so. If they don't care about those rules, that's they're thing; if there are consequenes to breaking those rules and those three kids are ready to accept those consequences, then OK. But you, John, shouldn't whine at this kid about him obeying the rules after having chided Hillary Clinton's campaign for whining about the rules of the Dem primary.
And then--THEN!--you have the gall to post a criticism of Lieberman (who, really, deserve every piece of criticism thrown at him) about--breaking rules!! WTF? Are you saying that some rules apply to some people, and that you know better than they which rules are important to obey and which are okay to ignore? How very Clintonian of you--or, as you'd apparently put it, "[v]ery interesting."
If there's some skulduggery going on and that, rather than the rules, is what's keeping the kid from endorsing, that's something else altogether. If you have evidence of or suspicions about that, you should mention them in your front-page posts about this matter, rather than just blindly ragging all over the kid.
hawkman
· 1 year ago
FYI, he is not a kid. He is in his mid-30s. YDA, unlike CDA, is for Young Democrats between the ages of 18-36, whether or not they go to college.
WADem
· 1 year ago
Seems like I feel just a little bit dumber every day. Thanks for that info; also, I read your comment about how it's OK for people to endorse as individuals, w/o speaking for their respective organizations. Seems like too fine a line to tread--if individual X, who's identified w/ Organization XO, endorses something or someone, it's kind of hard to believe that s/he is speaking only for him or herself--but I get it.
Still, why is John pillorying the guy if he's just playing by the YDA's rules? If John a) thinks the guy's not endorsing Obama (or anyone else) b/c he's got something to hide; and, b) thinks he knows what the guy's hiding, why doesn't he (John) come out and, well, if not say so, at least allude to whatever it is that he thinks is happening? Because right now it looks from the outside like John's taking someone to task for no good reason--and as I said, being hypocritical to boot.
WADem
jcgraham77
· 1 year ago
"You still have a chance to get on the Obama bus, David. But the bus isn't going to wait forever. Obama is going to be our nominee, and he's going to be our next president. The only remaining question is whether you're going to announce your endorsement before folks get tired of this little dance. "
Well THATS not elitist--basically, either we have to agree or get left behind and out of the democratic party? Thats the attitude that has been driving a wedge between me and this mess--we either join with the Obamaniacs or are left to fend for ourselves. Kind of like a fight on a playground in 4th grade.
TxDem08
· 1 year ago
Well, I'm a meber of YDA, and I just found out that the Judicial Council will have to meet at their next national meeting to determine if they will remove the two YDA superdelegates from office who endorsed a candidate. I am an Obama supporter, but I voted for David at convention and I believe he is doing the right thing here. Our rules were made this way to keep things even handed so we don't tear YDA appart. I know David is doing the right thing and I believe most people in YDA believe in him and that he is doing what is right. So, no matter what John says, the members of YDA trust David and admire him for standing up to defend the constitution of YDA that we elected him to defend. And the rules are very clear, he or anyone else cannot endorse, the other two that did endorse will probably be removed from office. So, let John write what he wants, it still doesn't change the fact that people in YDA trust him to do what is right and he is not willing to break the rules!
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Let me ask you this. Why was YDA given 3 Superdelegate positions if those superdelegates aren't permitted to endorse, vote for, anyone? That is what superdelegates are for.
liberal_texan
· 1 year ago
YDA was given three seats on the DNC (superdelegates) because young voters (18-35) are and have historically been very underrepresented on the DNC in proportion to their percentage of the Democratic vote. The three superdelegate positions are that the president, national committeeman and national committeewoman . They are automatic members of the DNC, as are leaders of many other major Democratic constituency organizations. They're added in order to ensure better representation on the DNC for groups that don't otherwise have equal representation such as young (under 36) Democrats. That's why they're there.
As for their role as superdelegates - well the nature of this year's presidential primary is probably something that was not considered by YDA when this bylaw clause was added. It's something that should be looked at and perhaps considered for revision at our meeting in Nashville in two weeks.
hawkman
· 1 year ago
Let's get a few things straight here, because no one seems to want to listen to anyone else.
First off, there is no way that Chrystal or Francisco are getting impeached in Nashville. That is obsurd.
Second off, Kirkland is right, the YDA bylaws prohibit endorsement. However, that same provision is in the bylaws of every State Party and every Central Committee in the Country. If the rules against endorsement were followed in that way, then every State Party chair that has already endorsed would be in a great deal of trouble.
This is not the intent of the rules. The intent of the rules is to keep Party organizations from endorsing. However, a position in an organization that then gives you the right to be a Super Delegate, allows you to endorse AS AN INDIVIDUAL. So long as you do not endorse on behalf of the organization, but as an individual Super Delegate, you have every right to do it.
It happens all the time, so long as it is made clear that they are not doing it on behalf of the organization. David Hardt has a responsibility as a Super Delegate to make this decision. Howard Dean, himself, has said that he wants all Super Delegates to make their decisions by July 1. Since we will not have an official nominee until August, either Howard Dean is asking Super Delegates to break their own rules, which I am sure he is aware of, or there is another interpretation at play.
bernardaB
· 1 year ago
Maybe he saw this Obama campaign material from Kentucky.
However, this does not bode well for Mr. Hardt and his supporters arguments.
Hardt's argument is that YDA's rules prevent him from endorsing, even though he is a Super Delegate. And that Francisco and Chrystal are going to be facing impeachment at the next available meeting in Nashville.
YDA met in Anaheim, CA in late February. If Francisco broke the rules, why was he not held to an impeachment proceeding then? Why wait till now? Now that the heat is on David Hardt. It seems that YDA leadership is taking a position through its actions.
I was willing to give leadership the benefit of the doubt (as a member of the organization and someone who was a YDA Convention Delegate and voted for David Hardt for President).
However, I am beginning to see that this witchhunt against Chrystal (primarily) is just a farce to give David cover from not endoring Obama.
Just my opinion.
starrpower
· 1 year ago
Here is his reply again to my second email Thanks for the question, yes, they broke the rules to endorse. As a result they are probably both going to face a hearing on their actions for breaking the rules. I don't have anything to do with that, and it's entirely up to our national body to determine what happens.
But both of them are also proud Democrats and will work for either Democrat who wins our Party's nomination. And I believe that our National Body will cut them some slack for breaking the rules. After all, we are not Democrats fighting republicans, these are two incredible Democrats who want to represent our Party's best interest and our Party will unite behind either Hillary or Obama after one of them clinches the nomination. And those who don't support our nominee, whomever it may be, probably weren't real Democrats in the first place. So, I have every bit of faith, our Party will unite, and we will win in November.
Kind Regards,
David
TxDem08
· 1 year ago
I have heard from multiple sources now that David has already privately pledged to Obama and that he was going to release an endorsement right after Crystal, but that the impeachment was thrown out there the day after Crystal came out endorsing Obama. I also remember when Francisco endorsed, at the meeting in Anaheim, it was all the talk if he was going to be impeached or not. But that the Judicial chair and members of the Judicial council were not there to even hold a meeting. Now, I see both sides arguments, but come on guys, who in their right mind would endorse after two of your fellow officers are being impeached for doing the same thing. John, why dont you just email him and find out who he privately plans to vote for? He doesn't have to make it public and face impeachment, but this would stop all this bickering. What do you think John? Or hell, I can get my brother to email him, My brother is gay and has a man crush on David....I don't get gay guys...but I bet he can find out!
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
I can't wait until you guys hear the rest of the story, hopefully in the next day or so. Mmm mmm mmmm, gonna be lots of red faces then :-)
All Comments
i thought we dealt with this yesterday?
does he read this blog, you think?
since his BF is a Clintonista, he probably has forgotten how to do math.
Thank you for your email. I appreciate your dedication to the Democratic Party.
The bylaws of the Young Democrats of America do not allow me to officially endorse a candidate in a Democratic Primary race. As such, I am a Proud Democrat and I will happily work my hardest for either Hillary or Obama, whomever wins the nomination of our Party because they are both good Democrats.
Kind Regards,
David Hardt
Why hasn't Howard Dean endorsed? I know YDA isn't the same level of importance, but the same concept remains. David needs to stay neutral here.
Hi Lois,
Thanks for the question, yes, they broke the rules to endorse. As a result
they are probably both going to face a hearing on their actions for breaking
the rules. I don't have anything to do with that, and it's entirely up to
our national body to determine what happens.
But both of them are also proud Democrats and will work for either Democrat
who wins our Party's nomination. And I believe that our National Body will
cut them some slack for breaking the rules. After all, we are not Democrats
fighting republicans, these are two incredible Democrats who want to
represent our Party's best interest and our Party will unite behind either
Hillary or Obama after one of them clinches the nomination. And those who
don't support our nominee, whomever it may be, probably weren't real
Democrats in the first place. So, I have every bit of faith, our Party will
unite, and we will win in November.
Kind Regards,
David
So throw a tantrum daily on your website. It's kind of pathetic, but if there's nothing else to report, I guess you can slag on David Hardt for following the rules....
... while at the same time rightfully hitting Clinton for trying to change the rules...
Hey, wait, that's contradictory!
SECTION 1205 Endorsements. It shall be the policy of the Young Democrats of America National Officers, National Committee, Convention, Committees, Regional Caucuses and Caucuses, not to provide official endorsements to any candidate in a contested primary election. Unit and local organizations are not bound by this policy, but are urged to carefully consider to possible organizational risks of such an endorsement.
How dare David Hardt follow YDA's rules!
Obama supporters (and I am one) rightly condemn Hillary Clinton for trying to change or ignore the rules to advantage her failing campaign.
Why are you now asking David Hardt to ignore the rules of the organization he was elected -- with 93% of the vote -- to lead? That's hypocritical.
David Hardt is right to abide by the rules of YDA. The other YDA superdelegates are wrong to have broken them.
Clearly, you're somewhat obsessed with trying to force David to act here. But what does he gain by acting, if it could cost him his position and, in turn, his vote at the Convention? What does Obama gain? It's not like Clinton's going to drop out because David Hardt comes out for Obama in mid-May as opposed to mid-June.
It's not an issue of can't. It's an issue of won't -- David Hardt won't break the rules of YDA, because he was elected to uphold those rules. That other elected officers haven't followed the rules is not an argument for David to abrogate his duties as president of YDA and violate the rules of the organization he leads.
And then--THEN!--you have the gall to post a criticism of Lieberman (who, really, deserve every piece of criticism thrown at him) about--breaking rules!! WTF? Are you saying that some rules apply to some people, and that you know better than they which rules are important to obey and which are okay to ignore? How very Clintonian of you--or, as you'd apparently put it, "[v]ery interesting."
If there's some skulduggery going on and that, rather than the rules, is what's keeping the kid from endorsing, that's something else altogether. If you have evidence of or suspicions about that, you should mention them in your front-page posts about this matter, rather than just blindly ragging all over the kid.
Still, why is John pillorying the guy if he's just playing by the YDA's rules? If John a) thinks the guy's not endorsing Obama (or anyone else) b/c he's got something to hide; and, b) thinks he knows what the guy's hiding, why doesn't he (John) come out and, well, if not say so, at least allude to whatever it is that he thinks is happening? Because right now it looks from the outside like John's taking someone to task for no good reason--and as I said, being hypocritical to boot.
WADem
Well THATS not elitist--basically, either we have to agree or get left behind and out of the democratic party? Thats the attitude that has been driving a wedge between me and this mess--we either join with the Obamaniacs or are left to fend for ourselves. Kind of like a fight on a playground in 4th grade.
As for their role as superdelegates - well the nature of this year's presidential primary is probably something that was not considered by YDA when this bylaw clause was added. It's something that should be looked at and perhaps considered for revision at our meeting in Nashville in two weeks.
First off, there is no way that Chrystal or Francisco are getting impeached in Nashville. That is obsurd.
Second off, Kirkland is right, the YDA bylaws prohibit endorsement. However, that same provision is in the bylaws of every State Party and every Central Committee in the Country. If the rules against endorsement were followed in that way, then every State Party chair that has already endorsed would be in a great deal of trouble.
This is not the intent of the rules. The intent of the rules is to keep Party organizations from endorsing. However, a position in an organization that then gives you the right to be a Super Delegate, allows you to endorse AS AN INDIVIDUAL. So long as you do not endorse on behalf of the organization, but as an individual Super Delegate, you have every right to do it.
It happens all the time, so long as it is made clear that they are not doing it on behalf of the organization. David Hardt has a responsibility as a Super Delegate to make this decision. Howard Dean, himself, has said that he wants all Super Delegates to make their decisions by July 1. Since we will not have an official nominee until August, either Howard Dean is asking Super Delegates to break their own rules, which I am sure he is aware of, or there is another interpretation at play.
http://race42008.com/2008/05/12/barack-obamas-p...
Let's play the jesus card.
However, this does not bode well for Mr. Hardt and his supporters arguments.
Hardt's argument is that YDA's rules prevent him from endorsing, even though he is a Super Delegate. And that Francisco and Chrystal are going to be facing impeachment at the next available meeting in Nashville.
Chrystal has endorsed within the last few days. However, Francisco endorsed Clinton back on January 5th (see Clinton campaign press release here: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view...).
YDA met in Anaheim, CA in late February. If Francisco broke the rules, why was he not held to an impeachment proceeding then? Why wait till now? Now that the heat is on David Hardt. It seems that YDA leadership is taking a position through its actions.
I was willing to give leadership the benefit of the doubt (as a member of the organization and someone who was a YDA Convention Delegate and voted for David Hardt for President).
However, I am beginning to see that this witchhunt against Chrystal (primarily) is just a farce to give David cover from not endoring Obama.
Just my opinion.
Thanks for the question, yes, they broke the rules to endorse. As a result they are probably both going to face a hearing on their actions for breaking the rules. I don't have anything to do with that, and it's entirely up to our national body to determine what happens.
But both of them are also proud Democrats and will work for either Democrat who wins our Party's nomination. And I believe that our National Body will cut them some slack for breaking the rules. After all, we are not Democrats fighting republicans, these are two incredible Democrats who want to represent our Party's best interest and our Party will unite behind either Hillary or Obama after one of them clinches the nomination. And those who don't support our nominee, whomever it may be, probably weren't real Democrats in the first place. So, I have every bit of faith, our Party will unite, and we will win in November.
Kind Regards,
David
Now, I see both sides arguments, but come on guys, who in their right mind would endorse after two of your fellow officers are being impeached for doing the same thing.
John, why dont you just email him and find out who he privately plans to vote for? He doesn't have to make it public and face impeachment, but this would stop all this bickering.
What do you think John? Or hell, I can get my brother to email him, My brother is gay and has a man crush on David....I don't get gay guys...but I bet he can find out!