Senator Bill Nelson, D-FL, will endorse Sen. Hillary Clinton for president, according to several sources with knowledge of his plans.
A well-connected Democratic strategist who asked not to be named did not think that Nelson's endorsement was part of a quid-pro-quo for Clinton's statement. But Nelson was quoted as recently as two weeks ago saying that his endorsement would depend on "how [the candidates] treat Florida."
An official with Nelson's office declined to confirm or deny the endorsement. They did, however, send a press release issued by the office in which the Senator criticized the stripping of his state's delegates. Nelson, the release read, is "happy to see that Clinton agrees with the principle at issue in his lawsuit - that every person has a right to vote, and have the vote count as intended."
What about the principle of playing by the rules, Florida? What about changing the rules in the middle of the game? Ezra Klein on Hillary's seat the delegates statement:
If this pushes her over the edge, the Obama camp, and their supporters, really will feel that she stole her victory. They didn't contest those states because they weren't going to count, not because they were so committed to the DNC's procedural arguments that they were willing to sacrifice dozens of delegates to support it. It's as hard as hardball gets, and the end could be unimaginably acrimonious. Imagine if African-American voters feel the rules were changed to prevent Obama's victory, if young voters feel the delegate counts were shifted to block their candidate.
And Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo says No Way: "All these particulars are secondary to the principle, which is that you don't change the rules in midstream to favor one candidate or another."
If this whole deal plays out the way Hillary wants, the caucuses are dead. It's a big middle finger to Howard Dean, to Iowa, and to process. Where are Hillary's Iowa supporters, and why aren't we hearing from them?