Florida delegates fully seated with one-half votes each

[Jon]

Sigh....

 

[Toro]

Frankly, as a resident of Florida, and one who has supported the Democrats over the past few elections, I don't think they should get a single vote. The Democratic Party in Florida are idiots. They were told that their delegates wouldn't get seated and they ran with the primary anyways.

That's just one of about 4000 or so reasons why the Florida Democrats are retarded.

 

[Care4all]

Frankly, as a resident of Florida, and one who has supported the Democrats over the past few elections, I don't think they should get a single vote. The Democratic Party in Florida are idiots. They were told that their delegates wouldn't get seated and they ran with the primary anyways.

That's just one of about 4000 or so reasons why the Florida Democrats are retarded.

I'm sorry to differ with you there Toro, but you don't even know your own states Politics...

The Republicans control the Florida Legislature by almost 2/3' s to 1/3 democratic...

the Florida Democrats agreed with the Republicans to move their Primary date up earlier than the March Date that they had in the last Presidential race....BUT NOT before the Feb 5 th allowed date.*

At the same time legislation that had been worked on for the last 4 years to make it mandatory that the Florida voting machines had papertrail was working its way thru congress... and ready to finally be passed in time to add the papertrail machines for the 2008 election....

EVERY DEMOCRAT for the last 4 years has been trying to get the majority republicans to get this legislation thru congress and signed by the governor.

The Republican Majority Legislature at the last second, stuck this mandatory to all democratic cause legislation on the papertrail in with the legislation that moved the Primary up 7 days earlier than the allowed date by the Democratic Party....

The Democrats HAD TO VOTE YES on this legislation.....

The DNC should have NOT EVER PUNISHED Florida Democrats in the first Place....

is how I see it...

 

[Jon]

I agree Care, and one of the members of the committee made the same point. She called for all delegates to be seated, but the vote lost 12-15. The vote to seat delegates at one-half was passed unanimously.

The good news is, and Ickes pointed out that Clinton had already said, they will appeal the ruling on Michigan.

 

[Care4all]

well, the michigan thing was absurd, they took 600k voters and nixed how they actually voted and reallocated it in to what some thought it would have been with alot of IFS...

JIMMINNEE CHRISTMAS!

and then they break michigan primary rules, they allocate the undecided delegates TO obama which was AGAINST the michigan rules!!!!! they gave edwards and biden's delegates to obama too!!! sheesh, they contorted every rule in the book to twist and break the rules ENOUGH to put hillary out of the race....????

this is disgusting

 

[Toro]

I'm sorry to differ with you there Toro, but you don't even know your own states Politics...

The Republicans control the Florida Legislature by almost 2/3' s to 1/3 democratic...

the Florida Democrats agreed with the Republicans to move their Primary date up earlier than the March Date that they had in the last Presidential race....BUT NOT before the Feb 5 th allowed date.*

At the same time legislation that had been worked on for the last 4 years to make it mandatory that the Florida voting machines had papertrail was working its way thru congress... and ready to finally be passed in time to add the papertrail machines for the 2008 election....

EVERY DEMOCRAT for the last 4 years has been trying to get the majority republicans to get this legislation thru congress and signed by the governor.

The Republican Majority Legislature at the last second, stuck this mandatory to all democratic cause legislation on the papertrail in with the legislation that moved the Primary up 7 days earlier than the allowed date by the Democratic Party....

The Democrats HAD TO VOTE YES on this legislation.....

The DNC should have NOT EVER PUNISHED Florida Democrats in the first Place....

is how I see it...

They did not HAVE to vote on this.

They just showed how incompetent they are.

They got played like a three-string fiddle here in Tallahassee.

Its embarrassing. Its like watching an un-funny comedian on stage. You just wish he'd get off, but he doesn't.

BTW, if McCain wins this state, it isn't because the Dems chose Obama and not Clinton. Its because they can't put together a half decent organization.

The current governor is a populist all the way. Two decades ago, he'd have been a Democrat. But they're so useless, what's the point? Crist is a politician first and a Republican second. So an ambitious politician goes with the most likely winner.

I can't believe McCain is even considering Crist.

 

[Ravi]

Sigh....

We aren't even 3/5 citizens.

 

[Marshall]

I was thinking the same thing. Echoes of a regretful past, reinstituted in the Democrat Party.

 

[Larkinn]

We aren't even 3/5 citizens.

If you judge your citizenship on being able to elect an individual for a NON-GOVERNMENTAL POSITION in a PRIVATE PARTY, then you are a fool.

 

[Care4all]

If you judge your citizenship on being able to elect an individual for a NON-GOVERNMENTAL POSITION in a PRIVATE PARTY, then you are a fool.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, wonder why EACH State Gvt spends millions of dollars each to run a certifiable Election...

Private MY ASS....if it was just a private party that was only INVOLVED then why the hell do states USE OUR TAX DOLLARS for this Private Party INSTEAD of these private parties making us pay for THEIR LITTLE private party GAME....


This ain't no PRIVATE game, this is the selection of who we choose as citizens to be our nominee for our President of the United States, and for HOW MANY STATE DELEGATES each is able to send to the CONVENTION....

I understand that the Democratic Party and the republican party are different private parties, but THEY ARE PARTICIPATING in a GOVERNMENT PROCESS for States to LEGALLY select our President.....

 

[Foxfyre]

It concerns me that a political party can tell me that my vote won't count because lawfully elected leaders scheduled the vote at a time displeasing to the political party. It seems to me to be a dangerous thing that the one person, one vote principle can be overturned for political expediency or political tradition.

 

[Ravi]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, wonder why EACH State Gvt spends millions of dollars each to run a certifiable Election...

Private MY ASS....if it was just a private party that was only INVOLVED then why the hell do states USE OUR TAX DOLLARS for this Private Party INSTEAD of these private parties making us pay for THEIR LITTLE private party GAME....


This ain't no PRIVATE game, this is the selection of who we choose as citizens to be our nominee for our President of the United States, and for HOW MANY STATE DELEGATES each is able to send to the CONVENTION....

I understand that the Democratic Party and the republican party are different private parties, but THEY ARE PARTICIPATING in a GOVERNMENT PROCESS for States to LEGALLY select our President.....

Good point care, there's nothing private about a taxpayer funded election.

And pretending the election isn't for a government official is laughable.

 

[Shogun]

well, it looks like you bitches just learned what a republic is.


I love the 3/5th reference, by the way.. as if you are being at all treated like a fucking SLAVE just because your vagina vote didn't win. Go create your own poltical party if you don't like the way the dems found a solution. You'll be just as significant as that green party that no one gives a fuck about.


here.. im LAUGHING at you people today. And, if you decide to go the way of Lieberman and Zell then fuck you and good riddance.


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KACQuZVAE3s&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KACQuZVAE3s&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

[Larkinn]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, wonder why EACH State Gvt spends millions of dollars each to run a certifiable Election...

Because they CHOOSE to do so. The government pays money for a variety of PRIVATE organizations.

Private MY ASS....if it was just a private party that was only INVOLVED then why the hell do states USE OUR TAX DOLLARS for this Private Party INSTEAD of these private parties making us pay for THEIR LITTLE private party GAME....

Because States can use your tax dollars for whatever the hell they feel like, public or private.

This ain't no PRIVATE game, this is the selection of who we choose as citizens to be our nominee for our President of the United States, and for HOW MANY STATE DELEGATES each is able to send to the CONVENTION....

No, actually its the selection of who you choose as DEMOCRATS, not as citizens. Which is why there is such a thing as "closed primary".

I understand that the Democratic Party and the republican party are different private parties, but THEY ARE PARTICIPATING in a GOVERNMENT PROCESS for States to LEGALLY select our President.....

No, actually they aren't. They are participating in a private process to see which individual each private party will run for president. Getting a nomination isn't a government job, its a private job.

 

[Larkinn]

Good point care, there's nothing private about a taxpayer funded election.

Actually yes there is. The government gives money to a whole host of private organizations.

And pretending the election isn't for a government official is laughable.

Really? So care to tell me which government position Kerry received from winning the Democratic Nomination for president in 2004?

 

[Larkinn]

It concerns me that a political party can tell me that my vote won't count because lawfully elected leaders scheduled the vote at a time displeasing to the political party. It seems to me to be a dangerous thing that the one person, one vote principle can be overturned for political expediency or political tradition.

If you are voting to put someone into office, it can't. Thats not the case here.

 

[Foxfyre]

If you are voting to put someone into office, it can't. Thats not the case here.

Are you sure? It is the state, not the party, that sets the date and process for the primary election in Michigan and Florida, and the candidates for the general election chosen in that process across the land are the presumed candidates to be the next President of the United States. You don't see a problem with the Party presuming to change the results of such elections?

For the same reason, I have a problem with the Texas primary plus caucus system this year.

Then again there is no Constitutional provision for the primary system and there was a time when the Party got together at a convention meeting to choose their candidate to run. Maybe that system produced better candidates? But once they turned it over to the people to choose the candidates, it bugs me that the Party would then presume to cancel out the vote of some voters.

But then I have a problem with dead people and/or non citizens and/or non registered voters voting too, so what do I know?

 

[Care4all]

If you are voting to put someone into office, it can't. Thats not the case here.

Bulloney...even the DNC Charter states that the Convention CAN NOT BEGIN WITHOUT all 50 states seated with their delegates...

The DNC rules and bylaws committee overstepped their own Charter, which overrules anything the committee has done....it is their Constitution.

The rules and bylaws committee had NO AUTHORITY to strip the citizens of their due representaion....no matter what the committee thinks...

They even broke their own Charter which does NOT allow for them to take any state's delegates from their certified vote, away from them completly, as they did so wrongly...

 

[manifold]

Good point care, there's nothing private about a taxpayer funded election.

And pretending the election isn't for a government official is laughable.

Didn't you once disagree with me when I made this exact point to support my position that ALL primaries should be open?

 

[Ravi]

Didn't you once disagree with me when I made this exact point to support my position that ALL primaries should be open?

You know, I think I did and it's been bugging me ever since what the argument was.