Florida and Michigan re-vote?

[BG5150]

Do you think that Michigan and Florida should re-vote their primaries?

I do not think so. Or if they do, the states themselves should pay for it. The DNC put the rules out there. The states chose to ignore the rules, knowing full well what the penalties wre; it's not like the sanctions came after the fact or were arbitrarily assessed.

People are saying the peoples' votes should count. Well, their elected officials saw to it that they didn't. If these people want to make their vote count, they should vote out of office the people who chose to ignore party rules and have the contests early.

[zen]

I'm slightly torn on the whole philosophy that the DNC can tell the states how and when they can select their own delegates, BUT, I do not think that the DNC should pay for a new set of primaries when the DNC was clear in the first place that the states could lose their delegates if the move up their voting before a certain date.

So, to recap my beliefs
1) I think the states should get to chose how they chose their delegates, and when
but
2) they made their choice having full forwarning that they could lose their delegates, and they went ahead and did it anyway, so, why should the DNC have to pay for new voting?

I say, new primaries because the voters have the RIGHT to be represented, but, I also say that the States pay for it.

[blackboard]

Unless Hillary wins both states 80/20 she still won't pass Obama.

[zen]

You know, something funny just struck me.

If this was a general election, the states would be suing. More importantly, if this was a situation where a democrat candidate lost to a republican, YOU KNOW that there would be law-suits to get delegates re-instated because "voters got disenfranchised".

I just thought it was interesting. Since it's the DNC (the crybabies group) itself that controls the delegates in this situation, no one is suing.

[Nik00117]

States did break the rules

However we can bend them here in this case

I think we should allow a re-election in those states. However the states foot the bill, end of story. The DNC should not pay a penny for this states are to foot the bill in the entirey, they don't like it then we don't count their votes end of disscussion.

[BG5150]

First of all, the right to vote in a primary is guaranteed. In most states, you must be registered with a particular party to be allowed to vote in that party's primary or caucus.

The DNC is the governing body of the Democratic party, and its committee gets to make the rules for the primaries and anything else on the national stage.

Is it a shame these people came out to vote and it was pretty much for show? (even though it was for a Democrat )Sure. Like I said in my first post: let their next vote count by ousting the people who allowed the early contest to begin with.

[Nik00117]

And they did vote in the primary, however their states didn't follow the rules.

One could easily argue the fact that since the public of those states largely knew that they would not be counted a largre morjirty didn't even show up. I know if i was in those states and I was told that my vote doesn't count I wouldn't vote, wouldn't be worth it.

Fact of the matter is this

Everyoen deserves the right to have their vote counted

Those two states broke the rules

They can't get off scott free but i'ma willing to cut them a bit of slack and allow them the right to have their votes count in a relection, states pick up the tab though.

[BG5150]

Darn, I mislabled the question of the poll. It should have been:

Should Michigan and Florida re-vote?

I know they are allowed to. They can probably do it three or four times if they don't like the outcome. (Though highly unlikely)

[killxswitch]

Anyone have a good link to a quick overview of what went wrong? My understanding of this situation is fragmented.

[BG5150]

Anyone have a good link to a quick overview of what went wrong? My understanding of this situation is fragmented.

1. Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada were slated to have the first primaries (or caucus) followed by South Carolina soon after.

2. Super Tuesday was supposed to be a pivotal day in determining who the candidates would be. And by many accounts, the race would pretty much be decided, if not on that day, but very soon thereafter.

3. Both Michigan and Florida were originally to have their contests after Super Tuesday.

4. Since both Michigan and Florida as big, populous states, each figured it should have more "say" in determining the candidate.

5. Both states thus decided to move their primaries to Jan 15 (Mich) and Jan 29 (Fla), the same day as South Carolina.

6. Last fall the Democratic National Committee (DNC) said the two states could not do that, and WARNED if they did, their delegates would not be seated at the national convention and the states' delegates' votes would not count for the purposes to determining the party's candidate for President in 2008.

7. Michigan and Florida ignored the warning, and in December 2007, the DNC officially said the delegates would be negated.

8. Well,t he states went ahead with their early primaries.

9. DNC still hasn't changed its mind and Mich and Fla are crying foul.

10. And since it is such a close race, Mich and Fla probably WOULD have made a big difference, and now they want to be able to re-vote and have the DNC pay for it.

[Nik00117]

I personalyl think the DNC should jsut take the delegate with the most delegates. Regradless if they have a clear majority or not.

[bjohnso]

I can't wait to sit back and watch the meltdown that will be the 2008 presidential election. This is just the beginning!

[killxswitch]

1. Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada were slated to have the first primaries (or caucus) followed by South Carolina soon after.

2. Super Tuesday was supposed to be a pivotal day in determining who the candidates would be. And by many accounts, the race would pretty much be decided, if not on that day, but very soon thereafter.

3. Both Michigan and Florida were originally to have their contests after Super Tuesday.

4. Since both Michigan and Florida as big, populous states, each figured it should have more "say" in determining the candidate.

5. Both states thus decided to move their primaries to Jan 15 (Mich) and Jan 29 (Fla), the same day as South Carolina.

6. Last fall the Democratic National Committee (DNC) said the two states could not do that, and WARNED if they did, their delegates would not be seated at the national convention and the states' delegates' votes would not count for the purposes to determining the party's candidate for President in 2008.

7. Michigan and Florida ignored the warning, and in December 2007, the DNC officially said the delegates would be negated.

8. Well,t he states went ahead with their early primaries.

9. DNC still hasn't changed its mind and Mich and Fla are crying foul.

10. And since it is such a close race, Mich and Fla probably WOULD have made a big difference, and now they want to be able to re-vote and have the DNC pay for it.

Thanks. What a mess.

[blackboard]

Florida democratic party is now saying they won't do another primary.

[dynamo]

bunch of cry babies i hate the government. its not like they didn't know what was going to happen, i say stfu and play by the rules. i mean come on its like your mother telling you not to eat ice cream before dinner but you do anyway then you get pissed off, wtf, i'd kick you out of my house if you pulled that ****. I recommend total government dissolving and the outlawing of campaigns and the election of public servents based on what they have done, not what they say they'll do. meh...sucks that people get elected into a position of power instead of a position of service. I wouldn't feel bad if they all just sort of died. Then maybe we could start over and get some policies that perhaps help people and not bureaucracy