Florida Democrats drop idea of primary redo

[Gunny]

Associated Press
updated 5:31 p.m. CT, Mon., March. 17, 2008

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - Facing strong opposition, Florida Democrats on Monday abandoned plans to hold a do-over presidential primary with a mail-in vote and threw the delegate dispute into the lap of the national party.

While the decision by Florida Democrats left the state’s 210 delegates in limbo, Democrats in Michigan moved closer to holding another contest on June 3. Legislative leaders reviewed a measure Monday that would set up a privately funded, state-administered do-over primary, The Associated Press learned.

Florida Democratic Party chairwoman Karen Thurman sent a letter announcing the decision.

“A party-run primary or caucus has been ruled out, and it’s simply not possible for the state to hold another election, even if the party were to pay for it,” Thurman said. “... This doesn’t mean that Democrats are giving up on Florida voters. It means that a solution will have to come from the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee, which is scheduled to meet again in April.”

more ... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23680304/

Wasn't it the Democrats who in 2000 wailed and moaned that voters were disenfranchised because votes weren't counted due to procedural/administrative error?

Yet they just disenfranchised the whole state.

 

[Larkinn]

Wasn't it the Democrats who in 2000 wailed and moaned that voters were disenfranchised because votes weren't counted due to procedural/administrative error?

Yet they just disenfranchised the whole state.

Actually that would be Crist and the Florida legislature who disenfranchised the state.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Actually that would be Crist and the Florida legislature who disenfranchised the state.

Wrong, the vote was held. The Democratic party refuses to abide by the vote because it happened a few days ahead of when the PARTY wanted votes to happen. Not because it wasn't fair, not because it wasn't legal, not because of any taint of corruption or stuffed ballots. BUT because the Party Leadership had a hissy fit and interfered in the right of a State to decide when, where and how they will hold a primary.

 

[Larkinn]

Wrong, the vote was held. The Democratic party refuses to abide by the vote because it happened a few days ahead of when the PARTY wanted votes to happen. Not because it wasn't fair, not because it wasn't legal, not because of any taint of corruption or stuffed ballots. BUT because the Party Leadership had a hissy fit and interfered in the right of a State to decide when, where and how they will hold a primary.

Neither candidate got to campaign there. It obviously wasn't fair. And no, the States don't get to decide when and where and how they will hold a primary. Not if they want it counted.

The Democratic party set out RULES for the primaries. Florida decided to take a gamble and broke them. If Crist and the legislature weren't so stupid they wouldn't be in this mess.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Neither candidate got to campaign there. It obviously wasn't fair. And no, the States don't get to decide when and where and how they will hold a primary. Not if they want it counted.

The Democratic party set out RULES for the primaries. Florida decided to take a gamble and broke them. If Crist and the legislature weren't so stupid they wouldn't be in this mess.

In other words, the Democrats have disenfranchised an entire State because it did not agree to a totally arbitrary date and as a State the Democrats chose to hold the Primary when they did.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Neither candidate got to campaign there. It obviously wasn't fair. And no, the States don't get to decide when and where and how they will hold a primary. Not if they want it counted.

The Democratic party set out RULES for the primaries. Florida decided to take a gamble and broke them. If Crist and the legislature weren't so stupid they wouldn't be in this mess.

Not true, the State Legislature decides the date for the primary....after all it is the State that pays for it.
I believe there can be earlier applications to the DNC for rearrangement of the schedule but I don't think that happened.

The legislation for the date passed almost unanimously in both houses.

Instead of penalizing the state of all its delegates, the DNC could have only penalized half of them - like the Republicans did.

 

[Ravi]

Actually that would be Crist and the Florida legislature who disenfranchised the state.

It wasn't Crist. He's not too bad for a Republican.

 

[Larkinn]

In other words, the Democrats have disenfranchised an entire State because it did not agree to a totally arbitrary date and as a State the Democrats chose to hold the Primary when they did.

Arbitrary date?

Actually they didn't want a leapfrog effect which would put primaries absurdly early.

Umm, no. As a state Crist (A Republican) and the Republican florida legislature chose to hold the primary when they did.

 

[Larkinn]

Not true, the State Legislature decides the date for the primary....after all it is the State that pays for it.
I believe there can be earlier applications to the DNC for rearrangement of the schedule but I don't think that happened.

Yes they do, but if they want those votes counted they need to play by the DNC's rules.

The legislation for the date passed almost unanimously in both houses.

Instead of penalizing the state of all its delegates, the DNC could have only penalized half of them - like the Republicans did.

Which makes sense....in 20-20 hindsight. At the time there was effectively no difference except that it effectively made Florida and Michigan useless, instead of only symbolically so.

 

[M14 Shooter]

In other words, the Democrats have disenfranchised an entire State because it did not agree to a totally arbitrary date and as a State the Democrats chose to hold the Primary when they did.

The state held the election, on the day of its choosing, as is its absolute right.
It is the DNC that chose to ignore the results.
There's no way to argue that anyone other than the DNC disenfranchised anyone.

Never mind that there's no right to vote in the nomination process -- the parties decide, with plenary power, how to determine their nominee; that decision in no way needs to include a vote.

 

[Larkinn]

The state held the election, on the day of its choosing, as is its absolute right.
It is the DNC that chose to ignore the results.
There's no way to argue that anyone other than the DNC disenfranchised anyone.

Never mind that there's no right to vote in the nomination process -- the parties decide, with plenary power, how to determine their nominee; that decision in no way needs to include a vote.

*sigh*

Crist and the Republican legislature knew in advance the results if they broke the rules . They broke the rules anyway.

 

[Ravi]

Why do you keep blaming this on Crist? He doesn't get to vote on the date.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why do you keep blaming this on Crist? He doesn't get to vote on the date.

Duh....
Crist (R)

 

[Larkinn]

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2007/09/crist-says-stat.html

"I think Florida is doing the right thing," Crist said Tuesday. "I think moving up our primary is exactly the right thing. I'm sort of amazed at what's happening with the national Democratic Party as it relates to this issue.

 

[Ravi]

Okay, he did have an opinion about it. And I'm not even sure if his opinion was wrong. No one could have predicted the failure of the levees.

Still, he didn't get to vote on the issue.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Okay, he did have an opinion about it. And I'm not even sure if his opinion was wrong. No one could have predicted the failure of the levees.
Still, he didn't get to vote on the issue.

Fact remains, a state can have its election whenever it wants.
If you choose to not accept the result of the election, for whatever reason, then YOU disenfranchised those that voted.

 

[maineman]

Fact remains, a state can have its election whenever it wants.
If you choose to not accept the result of the election, for whatever reason, then YOU disenfranchised those that voted.

this wasn't a STATE election, it was a party primary. The party gets to make the rules.... that's a fact. Florida and Michigan knew the rules...they chose to violate them.

Many voters in both states chose not to vote because they were aware of the rules and the meaningless nature of their unauthorized primary.

 

[Larkinn]

Fact remains, a state can have its election whenever it wants.

Fact remains the state chose to held the election at a particular time knowing full well that the results wouldn't count .

If you choose to not accept the result of the election, for whatever reason, then YOU disenfranchised those that voted.

Many individuals didn't vote because they knew it wouldn't count. If you then decide to count the results you are disenfranchising those voters.

 

[Ravi]

It's more complicated than you make it out to be. The Dems tried to get the Reps to separate two bills - paper ballots/primary dates. The Reps wouldn't do it so the Dems tried to amend the bill and change the day to the 5th of February. The Reps voted down the amendment. So the Dems went ahead and voted because paper ballots were important to them.

Regardless, the people harmed by all this BS are the voters. And it isn't true that people didn't vote anyway. They did. The Fla Dems told them to vote anyway, probably hoping the DNC would quit acting like jerks. IIRC, there was a record turn out.

 

[Larkinn]

It's more complicated than you make it out to be. The Dems tried to get the Reps to separate two bills - paper ballots/primary dates. The Reps wouldn't do it so the Dems tried to amend the bill and change the day to the 5th of February. The Reps voted down the amendment. So the Dems went ahead and voted because paper ballots were important to them.

Which sounds basically like the Florida Republicans pushing for an early primary date, and the Democrats getting screwed because of it.

Regardless, the people harmed by all this BS are the voters. And it isn't true that people didn't vote anyway. They did. The Fla Dems told them to vote anyway, probably hoping the DNC would quit acting like jerks. IIRC, there was a record turn out.

Acting like jerks? The DNC had a completely reasonable position, as did the RNC. It is incredibly harmful for all of the states to push up their primaries so early. And there have been record turnouts in pretty much every state that voted.