Granted, the Democratic Party is not the same as the United States. The former, only has to pretend to be democratic, the latter is bound by consitutional law. What if the roles were reversed?
Consider this scenario: A Southern state has rules to prevent blacks from voting. In order to punish them, the United States government decides not to count that state’s votes in the presidential election.
It’s my contention that unseating the Florida and Michigan delegates was completely wrong. It’s never right to deprive people of their votes, particularly because of something their elected representatives have done.
Please share widely!
Frankly, the state parties of Michigan and Florida brought this upon themselves. Democrats led the effort to move up the date in Michigan. In Florida it was a Republican idea, and was inserted into a bill that included paper-trail voting. The Democrats there could have made more of a fuss over the move, but they were complicit.
<
p>And frankly, in most years nobody would care. The typical nominee’s march to victory wouldn’t have missed Michigan and Florida, and the delegates would have been seated by the victor. Some hard feelings would have lasted, but choice prominent speaking roles would have papered over any longstanding damage.
<
p>But, this isn’t typical, this isn’t most years. Florida and Michigan are being silenced at a time when their voice could have a real impact. The two states voters’ are being silenced because the parties broke DNC rules, rules that can be changed.
<
p>Worse still, about half of the Democratic Party wants the voters of those states to be heard, while half does not. In America, reasonable efforts are supposed to be made to allow people to participate in the process. The idea that “you can’t pass a literacy rest and them’s the rules!” is unacceptable, so I’m not sure why “you voted earlier than scheduled, and them’s the rules!” is okay.
<
p>Let’s fact it, there is little reason or rhyme to most people’s positions, except that Clinton would stand to benefit from a re-vote Obama would not. Generally, feelings on this fall in line with candidate preference: Hillary supporters want these states to have their voices heard, Obama supporters want them silenced.
<
p>I support Hillary as our nominee. And I also think that Michigan and Florida should be punished by the DNC along with other states which violated the official schedule. While Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina are getting free passes on that score, Camp Obama is targeting the other two states. “Follow the rules” is a flexible mantra.
<
p>Most of this would be mere gamesmanship were it not for the fact that large numbers of Floridians and Michiganders are telling pollsters that a lack of representation in the Denver convention will impact their vote in November. Without Florida and Michigan, the Democrats are in real trouble — especially if running a nominee who cannot gain traction in Ohio.
<
p>For me, at this point it isn’t about democracy or fair play between Democrat A and Democrat B. It’s about winning in November, and part of doing everything possible to win this election is letting Michigan and Florida be heard now. Let me be crystal clear: if you want to shut up Michigan and Florida, you are willing to handicap the Democratic Party this fall. Pick your priority.
about what Floridians and Michiganders are telling pollsters?
Which I think totally defeats the purpose of the system.
Democratic machine politics.
<
p>I voted for Hillary, but at this point, am ready to get behind Obama. Frankly, I think his electability is coming into question as the Republican noise machine cranks up on Rev. Wright.
<
p>Like Sabutai, I just want us to win.
<
p>Mark