Florida Democrats drop idea of primary redo

[RetiredGySgt]

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



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.

And yet someone just made the claim a lot of voters did not vote because it was early. Which is it? Record turn outs or people staying home? It can not be both.

 

[Ravi]

I won't stop you from blaming it on the Reps, I just took issue with you blaming it on Crist.

The reason to move up the primaries was to give minorities more of a say in the election. Pretty ironic when you think about it. White bread states have had more importance for a long time. Why do you consider pushing up the primaries harmful?

 

[Larkinn]

And yet someone just made the claim a lot of voters did not vote because it was early. Which is it? Record turn outs or people staying home? It can not be both.

Actually it can be both, they aren't a dichotomy.

 

[M14 Shooter]

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.

No no no no no no no!
Dont you get it??

-Republicans ALWAYS get ALL the blame
-Democrats NEVER get ANY blame.

Regardless, the people harmed by all this BS are the voters. And it isn't true that people didn't vote anyway. They did.

Lets see:

2008:
856,944 Hillary Clinton
568,930 Barack Obama

2004:
538,216 John Kerry
70,922 John Edwards

2000:
451,718 Al Gore
100,277 Bill Bradley

So... the loser of the 2008 primary got almost as many votes as the combined total of each of the 2 previous primaries...and people supposedly didn't vote -- that is, voter tunrout was suppressed -- because they knew said vote would not count?

 

[Larkinn]

The reason to move up the primaries was to give minorities more of a say in the election. Pretty ironic when you think about it. White bread states have had more importance for a long time. Why do you consider pushing up the primaries harmful?

Because Iowa and NH will just move their primaries up even further and we will have a game of leap-frogging primaries where they will be so early as to be absurd.

The primary system is broken. The DNC/RNC need to force a national primary where all states vote on the same day...the way it is now is retarded. And they can't do that if states can break the rules at will.

 

[Larkinn]

No no no no no no no!
Dont you get it??

-Republicans ALWAYS get ALL the blame
-Democrats NEVER get ANY blame.

Please explain how the Democrats are at blame for trying to make the primary Feb 5th?

And really, you aren't one to be calling anyone else partisan. That is laughable.

Lets see:

2008:
856,944 Hillary Clinton
568,930 Barack Obama

2004:
538,216 John Kerry
70,922 John Edwards

2000:
451,718 Al Gore
100,277 Bill Bradley

So... the loser of the 2008 primary got almost as many votes as the combined total of each of the 2 previous primaries.

And people supposedly didn't vote -- that is, voter tunrout was suppressed -- because they knew said vote would not count?

*sigh*

There were record turnouts because people want to vote for Clinton and Obama because they are excited for them even knowing their vote wouldn't count . However some of those people who perhaps were less excited but would have voted if their vote counted, did not vote. Is this really so unimaginable?

 

[Ravi]

Because Iowa and NH will just move their primaries up even further and we will have a game of leap-frogging primaries where they will be so early as to be absurd.

The primary system is broken. The DNC/RNC need to force a national primary where all states vote on the same day...the way it is now is retarded. And they can't do that if states can break the rules at will.

Okay, that's a valid point. The primaries do need to be fixed, and in a way this was kind of forcing that issue. Still, screwing over the voters in Florida is a very bad idea for the DNC.

 

[Larkinn]

Okay, that's a valid point. The primaries do need to be fixed, and in a way this was kind of forcing that issue. Still, screwing over the voters in Florida is a very bad idea for the DNC.

Most of the country is screwed over every primary cycle because the candidates are decided before they get a chance to vote. This is trying to fix that. Florida's representatives decided to test the major political parties, and they are going to lose as they should.

 

[Toro]

The Democrat Party here in Florida couldn't find its own head up its own ass.

Plus, I don't know if they have enough money.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Because Iowa and NH will just move their primaries up even further and we will have a game of leap-frogging primaries where they will be so early as to be absurd.

The primary system is broken. The DNC/RNC need to force a national primary where all states vote on the same day...the way it is now is retarded. And they can't do that if states can break the rules at will.

The National Parties have no power or authority to dictate to the States when those states will hold elections nor when they will spend their money and use their staff to run said elections. They are not Government entities and the States are Sovereign Governments that do not cow tow nor bend to National Parties.

What you are suggesting is illegal and unconstitutional. It would require the Federal Government to force it and establish it. You are trying to give to PRIVATE organizations Governmental power.

 

[Larkinn]

The National Parties have no power or authority to dictate to the States when those states will hold elections nor when they will spend their money and use their staff to run said elections. They are not Government entities and the States are Sovereign Governments that do not cow tow nor bend to National Parties.

These aren't elections for any government office, therefore yes actually the National Parties do effectively have that power.

By the way, the Democratic Convention isn't controlled by the government, rather its controlled by the DNC. So if you want to get delegates seated you have to play by their rules. Florida and Michigan didn't, so it sucks for them.

 

[maineman]

The National Parties have no power or authority to dictate to the States when those states will hold elections nor when they will spend their money and use their staff to run said elections. They are not Government entities and the States are Sovereign Governments that do not cow tow nor bend to National Parties.

What you are suggesting is illegal and unconstitutional. It would require the Federal Government to force it and establish it. You are trying to give to PRIVATE organizations Governmental power.

primaries are the business of the party, and not the government. the national party has every right to tell the state committees when they can or cannot hold their primaries, and if they chose to disregard the edict from the national party, the national party is completely within their rights to not seat any delegates to THEIR convention from the offending states.

 

[Gunny]

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

Wrong.

 

[Larkinn]

Wrong.

Gee, you would blame this event on the Democrats?

Who would've guessed.

Stunning argument, by the way.

 

[Gunny]

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.

The Democrat party has no right to set any rules on how and when a state holds its primaries. Florida held theirs. The Democrats chose to not allow their votes to count.

The Democrat party disenfranchised Florida Democrats. Simple math.

 

[Larkinn]

The Democrat party has no right to set any rules on how and when a state holds its primaries. Florida held theirs. The Democrats chose to not allow their votes to count.

The Democrat party disenfranchised Florida Democrats. Simple math.

Right...so Democrats shouldn't be allowed to decide how the Democratic nominee is selected. Makes a whole ton of sense, really.

Did Florida know that holding their primary before Feb 5th would cause Democratic votes not to be counted in the convention? Yes they did. They did it anyway. Hence they caused the votes not to count.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You two are amazing.

Non Governmental National Parties have no power to tell a State Government when or how it will run an election. That you claim they do is hilarious.

Those parties want to pay for and run their own elections, they can do so WITHIN the laws of the State they do so, with no help or money from the State.

Primaries are NOT National elections. Some States do not even HAVE primaries. Caucus as far as I am aware are NOT paid for nor run by the States. The Federal Government has no authority to force primaries for ANY party on ANY State. Well not with out an Amendment. How the parties chose whom to endorse and run is NO business of the Federal Government and each State decides on its own if a popular vote is worthwhile to that State. Then since THEY pay for it and run it through the election process with STATE employees, the STATES get to decide when, how and where primary voting will occur.

 

[Larkinn]

You two are amazing.

Non Governmental National Parties have no power to tell a State Government when or how it will run an election. That you claim they do is hilarious.

Those parties want to pay for and run their own elections, they can do so WITHIN the laws of the State they do so, with no help or money from the State.

Primaries are NOT National elections. Some States do not even HAVE primaries. Caucus as far as I am aware are NOT paid for nor run by the States. The Federal Government has no authority to force primaries for ANY party on ANY State. Well not with out an Amendment. How the parties chose whom to endorse and run is NO business of the Federal Government and each State decides on its own if a popular vote is worthwhile to that State. Then since THEY pay for it and run it through the election process with STATE employees, the STATES get to decide when, how and where primary voting will occur.

And if they don't follow the rules, the DNC has NO obligation to seat those delegates. Florida PURPOSEFULLY and KNOWINGLY broke those rules.

 

[maineman]

You two are amazing.

Non Governmental National Parties have no power to tell a State Government when or how it will run an election. That you claim they do is hilarious.

Those parties want to pay for and run their own elections, they can do so WITHIN the laws of the State they do so, with no help or money from the State.

Primaries are NOT National elections. Some States do not even HAVE primaries. Caucus as far as I am aware are NOT paid for nor run by the States. The Federal Government has no authority to force primaries for ANY party on ANY State. Well not with out an Amendment. How the parties chose whom to endorse and run is NO business of the Federal Government and each State decides on its own if a popular vote is worthwhile to that State. Then since THEY pay for it and run it through the election process with STATE employees, the STATES get to decide when, how and where primary voting will occur.

I do not disagree. primaries are not elections. democrats in florida have no expectation that their delegates be seated because they KNEW they were breaking the rules when they set it up. I got no sympathy for them.

and the PARTY could very well decide to hold a national primary... if the DNC decreed that nobody's delegates would be seated unless they held the primary on a predetermined single day, they could make that call and the states would have to oblige them.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I do not disagree. primaries are not elections. democrats in florida have no expectation that their delegates be seated because they KNEW they were breaking the rules when they set it up. I got no sympathy for them.

and the PARTY could very well decide to hold a national primary... if the DNC decreed that nobody's delegates would be seated unless they held the primary on a predetermined single day, they could make that call and the states would have to oblige them.

No they would not. The States could and some if not most would just not hold votes or hold them when they want ANYWAY.