it doesn't matter. If he had somehow gotten an ad buy that specifically excluded Florida, they would have just claimed he was ignoring Florida voters and that the next Dem nominee can't be dissing Florida or whatnot.

They're full of crap. They will say anything.

That's the amount of money Obama campaign manager David Plouffe says they've raised online since

"terciary" should be "tertiary," no?

If the media can't describe HRC's shameless effort to change the rules in the middle of the game AGAIN, they're absolutely hopeless.

Weak talking point. No voter outside Florida cares about the ins-and-outs of Florida campaigning. And from a reporter/wonk/headline-writer perspective, it just seems desperate, because Hillary is going to Florida to raise cash.

From Politico:

"Clinton will travel to raise Florida to raise money, which may be allowed due to a loophole in the agreement not to campaign there."

The tone of this post really bothers me. This isn't an open question, one of those issues where we need mindlessly to give equal consideration to both sides in the interest of pseudo-objectivity. One team is cheating, and they're snake-charming the media (even Scheiber!) into reporting on it like anything else.

We should be talking about Bush/Florida/2000, not whether HRC picked up a handy talking point. Reset that moral compass, Mr. Scheiber.

Micelf is right -- nothing Obama would have done or not done would have changed Hillary's play in Florida.

It's worth remembering that Hillary didn't just make a verbal promise not to contest Florida -- though god knows it would be nice to live in a world where one would expect a politician to honor her "mere" verbal promises -- she put it in writing and signed a pledge. Like an employee might sign a contract, or how a home-buyer might sign a loan agreement, or, and here's where it matters, like how a president might sign a law.

Does Hillary actually have to put on a rubber George W. Bush mask for her supporters to realize that she's Dubya with a D after her name, as far as respect for rules and persona integrity are concerned? I don't want to replace a devious rulebreaking Republican with a devious rulebreaking Democrat; I want to have a president who isn't a devious rulebreaker.

Noam is just saying they handed her a talking point -- say this comes up in the debate, HRC can say "we both ran ads that aired in Florida" and deflect an attack.  Don't you think to non-political obsessives that would sound convincing, maybe even make Obama look like a hypocrite?  

S.V. Dáte has covered Florida politics for a dozen years, and today, aside from writing this piece on

Hillary and Florida, recycled

It looks like Clinton might score a win so impressive in FL (see chart at www.pollster.com/08-FL-Dem-Pres-Primary.php, where Obama has suddenly and dramatically lost ground) that it might be hard to ignore, despite the fact that it is a delegate-less contest. Would FL be an early indication of the backlash or are voters there simply sympathetic to Hillary because of her  noise about ensuring that the FL delegates are seated...or both? She'll have a rally there at the close of the polls tonight, so I am sure there is deliberate strategy there that has been ignored in the mass hysteria. At the very least, Hillary wants to change the "narrative" before Feb. 5, and if she wins impressively in FL, she just might accomplish that.

Those are actual voters who are going to the polls in Florida--not bloggers, posters, or talking heads. And the pre-election polling there looks a lot like the polling in 20 of the 22 February 5th states. Whether or not Obamaites want to admit it, this is real and meaningful however Obama wants to spin it. And it is going to be repeated elsewhere.

The story here is real voting vs. media vaporware.

I think this is where pccostello's Hillary defending jumped the shark.

The Democratic Presidential candidates agreed not to campaign in Michigan and Florida because the states moved their primaries up against DNC rules. They agreed no delegates would be seated at the convention. They agreed the states would have no say in the nomination.

Of course, that was when Hillary was inevitable. That was when she was going to have the nomination sown-up by New Hampshire. But now that Obama has put her on the ropes, her campaign is spinning like a pulsar, desperately trying to give her a news-cycle win before February 5. Hello Sunshine State!

Because there has been zero campaigning in Florida, Clinton is polling well there for the same reason she started off so far ahead in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina: name recognition. And in Flordia, maybe some solidarity with Clinton-Gore for 2000.

Voters in Florida know that they aren't going to have a say. They haven’t had a chance to get involved in the campaign because their state legislators hung them out to dry. So they are going to stay home; except for Hillary voters, because now this is a must win. (By the way, how bad is it for her that Florida--which doesn't count, remember--is a must win.)

So Hillary is going to win the vote in Florida today; but this is not "real voting."

“Real voting” takes place next Tuesday when voters who have a say in the nomination will be going to the polls all over the country. Voters who know how important their vote is because it will count. Why don’t you worry about those votes, and not the Straw Poll taking place tonight.

Florida doesn't count. Stop saying it does.

The interest in the election has been very intense in Florida. They weren't sawed off the East Coast--they get the news there. The number of advance votes is four times what it was in previous years. Turn-out will probably be heavy. Obama ran commercials there. Hillary has not campigned there--no press, no public appearances. If anyone shaded the rules, it was Obama by making a media buy which showed commercials in Florida.

Adam, I'm in 90% agreement with you, but hang on a sec -- why would only Hillary voters come to the polls and not Obama voters?  There HAS to be a number of state/local primaries being contested, right?  And even if there was no interest in those races, might voters for all three candidates want a voice in the straw poll, maybe even more so since they *are* disenfranchised and this is their only shot?  Don't tell me that if Obama beat Hillary in Florida, it wouldn't be major news.  Sure, the reverse is less so for the reasons you say, but if there's a huge outpouring for her, that's at least notable -- you can't attribute that to a private fundraiser or two.  

pulsar.

lymon, the rules are the rules, Florida has no delegates so there votes don't count. The Democratic citizens should take it out on their own local party officials. If this disadvantages Hillary that is unfortunate, but I don't believe it is fatal. Either Hillary or Obama will have the necessary delegates before the convention, and if Hillary doesn't she will be abandoned because Edwards will side with Obama as will the superdelegates. If I were to bet now I would think Hillary will have the necessary delegates, but my bet would be pretty small.

lymon,

Good points, but that just affirms why the Democratic primary should be ignored: we have no idea who's voting and why. Florida wasn't contested; to now claim it is a contest is silly.

But I will concede that if Obama were to win, it would be a huge news story. But that's only because the Clinton campaign is trying to spin a Clinton win as game-changing. If she doesn't, well, you reap what you sow.