Welcome to PatsFans.com

Florida and Michigan Primaries

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by FreeTedWilliams, Mar 6, 2008.

  1. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes Received:
    54
    Ratings:
    +132 / 31 / -3

    #75 Jersey

    I can't believe I'm saying this, but it appears that Howard Dean appears to be reasonable with this...

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080306/D8V805P00.html

    Now the Democrats, I guess, are free to set down whatever rules they want for the election of the delegates to their national convention. ALthough many steps in this process seem to be designed to marginalize the will of the electorate (caucuses the night after the primary, superdelegates, et al) and enpower the leadership of the DNC. But I don't know wether he is afraid that their is going to be a repeat of the Chicago convention, or what, but it is funny that the party that always cries about "disenfranchment" of voters, systematically denied 4 million people their right to vote, but it seems that they are going to "re-do" Michigan and Florida.

    Now Gov. Crist of Florida (maybe be McCain's VP) is teaming with Hillary supporter and Michigna Gov (i forget her name, (honestly)) to call that their citizens not be "disenfranchised" by the DNC.

    There is no way, that they could seat the current Michigan delegation, as neither Edwards nor Obama, even had their names on the ballot (funny how Hillary agreed to one set of rules, but then went ahead and did differnetly to "suit" (that's for you Harry) her. And Hillary was the only one who ran media ads in Florida, so that outcome is a little less dubious, but still shaky. I guess the only fair thing to do is to have another primary in each state. Boy is that going to dip into the respective budget's of the Michigan and Florida Democrat parties.

    Personally, I think that they should have Hillary and Obama do a steel cage "deathmatch" to decide who gets the delegates, but alas, I don't think that is going to happen.
  2. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,827
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +184 / 4 / -6

    Yeah, I think they should have a new primary. After all, both Michigan and Florida are swing states, so the Democrats can't afford to alienate the state party. The original expectation was the Hillary Clinton would breeze to victory and then Obama would be able magnanimously offer to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations.

    Quite frankly, I think he could even do that now. He has a substantial enough lead that, even with Florida and Michigan, the only realistic way for Hillary Clinton to win is for the superdelegates to really buck the Democratic voters big time (and I don't think that will happen). But, a new election is certainly the fairest solution, and I bet there are a few Democratic bigwigs who could bankroll it.
  3. STFarmy

    STFarmy Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Why should they get another primary? In Florida, the state party was given the option of a later caucus that would be counted, and they didn't do it. They did an earlier primary anyway. They disenfranchised their own voters. It's not fair to the voters, that's for sure, and they should let their leaders know it. If they do have another primary, the state party should pay for it, not the state.
  4. PatsFanInMaine

    PatsFanInMaine Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    This brings up an interesting legal question. Is a revote legal under the law? Hillary Clinton made the choice to run in Michigan and Florida. The other candidates either made the choice not to (MI) or didn't spend money (FL). By doing a revote, do you disenfranchise all those voters that voted in the 1st election? Its not out of the realm of possibility that voters from each state could raise this issue in court. I can think of several scenarios where a voter could prevail in such circumstance.
  5. jack

    jack Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    How about bringing in the supreme court to make the decision?
  6. ArmyPatsFan

    ArmyPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The counter would be the people who have already contacted the DNC and news agencies to say they did not vote because they were told their vote would not count. Florida and Michigan f'ed up on this imo. Not sure how to fix this....but at least it is entertaining to watch..and I live in Florida.
  7. PatsFanInMaine

    PatsFanInMaine Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Its a possibilty. As a lawyer I just see potential legal problems with a revote.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>