Democrats Battle Over Florida Primary

[Clovis Sangrail]

Source: Guardian

Florida Democrats could lose their votes for the presidential nominee next year unless they change plans to hold their primary earlier than national party rules allow.

The Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee was poised Saturday to vote against Florida's plans for a Jan. 29 primary and to strip the state of delegate votes at the national convention in Denver next year, several party officials said.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6875612,00.html

---

Comments?

[angrycarpenter]

1. most of floridas' democrats

act like republicans anyway. So now they are taking actions that may take away A very important vote from some of the most ignored democratic voters in the nation, just like A republican would.

[LiberalFighter]

2. Primary elections should be held between March and June

Or some variation, preferably on a region to region basis in a 6 to 8 week window.

Primaries should be rotated to take the me first out of the equation.

[Feron]

33. I agree

I've never voted in a primary because by the time it rolls around to Louisiana the nominee has already been chosen.

[LiberalFighter]

36. There aren't other positions either state or local to determine for the general election?

[Yupster]

60. My idea is a lottery

Pick out the dates and pick the states out of a hat each four years to fill in those dates. It would be exciting because it would be a tv event and it would be more fair than having the same states first every time.

[demo dutch]

67. Why can't we have a national primary!

[kdmorris]

3. I have a comment

It pisses me off. Our Republican-led legislature passed a law that basically disenfranchised EVERY Democrat in the state. The RNC says they may do the same to Republican voters, but I doubt they will.

This is complete bullshit. Why do we have rules that say that Iowa and New Hampshire have more of a weight, more of a say than other states? Our primary system is a travesty.

That being said, this seems to be a calculated move on the part of Florida Republicans to disenfranchise Democratic votes. The rules apparently state that, if the DNC gives in and allows us to have a primary on Jan. 29, candidates can't campaign here. WTF?????

I think that the primary system is broken, but THIS was not the way to handle it. THIS was not the way to try to change it. And I and other Democrats in Florida are the ones that are going to pay for it. I am the one that will have to take whatever candidate is chosen by everyone else in the United States instead of being able to have a voice.

And yes, this is a rant, not an intellectual, well-thought out piece of literature. I'm angry.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

37. I'm angry right-along-side of you.

:mad:


:hug:

[Why Syzygy]

42. n/m

deleted

[wordpix]

54. I saw on TV a FL Dem saying angrily that this primary date was tacked onto a repug bill

and put FL Dems between a rock and a hard place. I wish I could remember which bill it was! I recall it was a bill Dems did not want to vote against, so they voted for it with the primary date tacked on, putting them in a bad situation.

The main point: it was the REPUKES in FL's legislature who chose this primary date. I see a Rovian plot! :puke: :grr:

Sorry I don't have more info but people should watch for this.

[kdmorris]

55. Oh, they did tack it on

But the Florida Democratic Party leaders (i.e Karen Thurman) could have done something at the time to try to work with the DNC or say "Hey, we didn't have anything to do with this, but it's getting pushed on us". But she didn't do that. She allowed it to go through and then thumbed her nose at the DNC after they said they would sanction Florida.

[WhiteTara]

61. the araguement is that a paper trail amendment

was part of the bill, and they would be humiliated if they voted no.

[demo dutch]

64. That's how they do business in FL

[seriousstan]

4. DNC strips Fla. of delegates -- primary wouldn't count

Source: politico

The Democratic Party has taken a swipe at the nation's fourth biggest state, stripping Florida of all of its '08 delegates as punishment for jumping the gun with its Jan. 29 primary. Florida's early date could force other states to move up and up to stay at the front of the pack.

Under a vote taken moments ago by a powerful committee of the Democratic National Committee, if things don’t change, Florida’s primary will be a "beauty contest" — the delegates won’t count toward the party’s presidential nomination.

Florida officials complained that the DNC was going to "disenfranchise voters," as it says on the state party's home page. The DNC pushed back strongly against that contention, since it has rules that Florida decided not to follow.

This is the party’s way of trying to stop the crazy domino effect of states moving their nominating contests earlier and earlier, which causes OTHER states to go earlier and earlier.



Read more: http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/category/Convention

[kdmorris]

5. Self Delete

Never mind...

[seriousstan]

8. It is not a dupe if it has not been posted in LBN.

[kdmorris]

10. Oh, sorry

Didn't know that. I just saw it was the same source as the other one.

Whoopsie. I'll edit it.

[robcon]

6. Wow, this has escalated dramtically.

n/t

[Kagemusha]

9. What else could they do?

This escalated when the Florida party said, we're too important for your petty national rules.

[kdmorris]

11. It wasn't the Florida party

It was the Republican led Florida legislature that forced this into the showdown.

They KNEW when they did it that there were going to be sanctions and didn't care. After all, it's just the Dems that are going to lose the right to vote in the Primary. The RNC has made some noise about sanctioning, too, but I bet you $5 they don't do it.

[Kagemusha]

21. Now come on. I read the party's press release backing the move here on DU.

If they hadn't done that I wouldn't have said anything but, I saw that with my own two eyes on this site. (Edit: Just to not be subtle, the Florida branch of the Democratic Party.)

[kdmorris]

27. Oh, I'm not saying that the "Democrats" in Florida...

didn't sanction it. Hell, most of the Democrats in the Legislature voted to do this. But it wasn't the Florida Branch of the Democratic Party that did this. It was the Legislature. And, unfortunately, many of them are just DINOs.

The problem I have is that THEY are not the ones that are going to get fucked over. I SURE AS HELL didn't want this, but all the letter writing I did fell on deaf ears. And now, if they don't stop acting like idiots, I'm not going to be allowed to vote in the Democratic Primary.

We'll see what happens, but I figured since everyone knew this would happen, they aren't likely to change anything in the next 30 days.

[Kagemusha]

28. I'm not going to sit here and say the Florida party is formed of non-Democrats.

And I'm not going to say that it's the legislature's fault if the state party backed it to the hilt.

And no, I don't expect them to change either. But the state party should've brought it up nationally when the schedule was being set.

[kdmorris]

29. I understand what you are saying

I think I misunderstood what you were saying at first, which is what the first response was all about. Sorry about that.

I didn't think that the Florida Democratic Party had any options after the Legislature passed this and the governor signed it, but I'm perhaps wrong.

[Kagemusha]

30. They essentially told the national party, we support this and btw, kiss our butts.

I am not kidding you, that's how it was written. They felt just too important to snub. The party would bend to their will because it had no choice.

[kdmorris]

31. Yeah, since we started this conversation....

I did some reading. Apparently, they could have done something when the Legislature did this, but sat quietly by the wayside, twiddling their thumbs. After it happened, they said they had to back the plan or "it would disenfranchise voters". What a stupid, stupid argument!! They are disenfranchising all 4 million of us now.

Guess they found out that they weren't too important to snub. And the DNC can't back down or every state will flout the rules and the whole primary season will become an even worse mess than it is, and before you know it, we will have Iowa caucuses at the end of September.

Thanks for the information!

[toughboy]

7. This is great?

[Dr.Phool]

12. I've been watching from afar for a while.

I had a good discussion with a friend a while back, trying to figure out which party would implode or collapse first.

I don't think we're in a full collapse yet, but we're gaining on the Repukes fast.

[Lochloosa]

13. Thanks DNC. I guess my vote won't count AGAIN!

The Dems did not do this. Look out our state politics. IT WAS THE REPUGS!

ASSHOLES!

[saracat]

14. I can't say I am sorry. Florida asked for this they wrote the DNC and said they

supported this and would do what they wanted, and so they did.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

24. Nice.Did you read the letter the Fla Dem Party wrote to the DNC. F88ck You is what

they said to the DNC.

[whopis01]

46. You are missing the point entirely.

Unless you honestly feel that the proper solution to this problem is to disenfranchise an entire state worth of Democratic voters in the primary based on the actions of a small group of elitists in the Fla Dem Party and the Fla Legislature.

This is a three way pissing contest between the Fla Dem Part, Fla legislature and the DNC. And the Democratic voters of Florida are the ones who it is all raining down upon. So I say FU to all three of those groups and anyone who supports them or thinks that Democratic voters in Florida are deserving of this.

All I am asking for is my vote. I do not care when it is, I just care that I have the opportunity to cast it. If you think that I, or any other voter in Florida is undeserving of that, I would like to hear your explanation.

Do you even understand what the word democratic means?

[saracat]

53. Please.This is a partisan primary governed by the rules of party it represents.

Florida doesn't get to single itself out and refuse to abide by the rules of The Democratic Party.And state organization that so flouted the rules would suffer the same consequences. You may not care when you cast your vote but the Florida State Party does and enough that they jeopardize your ability to vote in the Primary.That is just wrong of them. That being said, I understand that something is attempting to be worked out today.Let us hope so. But Florida should not be the exception to the rules that all other states have to follow.

[raebrek]

68. But wouldn't you think?

Wouldn't you think the Fla Dem's and the DNC could stick together?

Raebrek!!!

[bluestateguy]

15. Is there anything to be gained from this move?

This is the first time I have disagreed with one of Howard Dean's actions as DNC chair.

If it's diversity that we are concerned about, the Florida primary will be made up of high percentages of minorities.

I don't agree with all of the front-loading either, but to single out Florida here is stupid.

[MaineDem]

16. It isn't Dean's decision

There are automatic penalties in the Rules.

Let's see what can be negotiated over the next 30 days.

[struggle4progress]

17. The usual wingnut spin from the Reepers at "politico":

"The Democratic Party has taken a swipe at the nation's fourth biggest state"

What a crock that sentence is

[onewholaughsatfools]

18. I always find good news at DU

thanks so much...blessings

[sakabatou]

19. My troll senses are tingling

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

23. See you later.

Nay.
You're.
It.

Sayulita, Nayarit


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayulita

[Stuckinthebush]

20. Stupid move by the DNC

All of this to protect NH...it is so ridiculous.

If the DNC would discuss a rotation system then perhaps we wouldn't see the scramble to be meaningful. What they don't understand - or care to understand - is that a lot of Democratic voters are disenfranchised under the current system anyway. In the past, the voting meant little anyway by the time it got to the Spring and Summer primary states. Candidates would drop out after a bad showing in Iowa, NH and South Carolina so we were stuck with only a few to vote for. But to save little New Hampshire's place in the national spot light once every four years, the Dems have to get draconian with their rules. I'd rather Florida Dems have more say in our eventual candidate than New Hampshire anyway.

The Democratic party is getting more and more foolish every day.

[IndianaGreen]

56. Having Iowa and New Hampshire first is bad for democracy and for the American people

I still haven't gotten over how Iowans in 2004, instead of choosing a candidate which represented their views and interests, decided to vote the one they thought was more "electable."

Iowa's "Mister Electable" led the party to defeat in 2004, and lost an easy to win election against the biggest moron we ever had in the Oval Office. All of our efforts and ABB coalitions amounted to nothing, all because Iowa chose "Mister Electable" instead of one that stood for something other than "I am not Bush." "I voted for it before I voted against it," is still burning my ears! Thanks a lot, Iowa!

I fear that Iowa and New Hampshire will put the screws on the American people again, by voting for "It's time to have a woman President," instead of the candidate which best represents our interests and aspirations.

Having Iowa and New Hampshire first is bad for democracy and for the American people, and if it takes a train wreck to bring that message home, so be it!

[moondust]

62. Sheer nonsense.

Blaming Iowa and New Hampshire is just a cheap shot on some easy targets. If the Democratic primary system is compromised it is not because of Iowa or New Hampshire or South Carolina or Nevada. It's because lemming-like Democrats elsewhere do not have the spines to stand up and vote for their own choices, instead choosing to stay home or vote for candidates that the MSM and people like Terry MacAuliffe continually shove at them in the name of "unity" or "momentum" or whatever sound bite seems to work.

Iowa has 57 delegates.
New Hampshire has 30.
South Carolina has 54.
Nevada has 33.

Florida has 210.
Texas has 228.
New York has 280.
California has 440..

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/D-Del.phtml

Do the math.

[dbackjon]

66. Exactly. The NH/Iowa first bit is assinine.

[liquiduniverse]

32. It's not like Florida's primary ever matters any way

Every time in my lifetime, the primary winner has all but been chosen by the time vote day comes around. If somehow, there was a close race when it got down to convention time, I guarantee those Florida votes are going to matter.

[TechBear_Seattle]

25. The solution taken by Washington State Dems was to ignore the primary entirely

Anyone who votes in the Washington Primary on the Democratic ballot is wasting their time: THEIR VOTE WILL BE IRRELEVANT according to the state party leadership. Instead, delegates to the national convention will be selected at caucuses several weeks latter.

[ButterflyBlood]

26. That's a solution the Florida Democrats can do

Even if it was the Republican-led legislature that moved it up, here's one scenario.

[kskiska]

34. DNC Strips Florida Of 2008 Delegates

Source: WP

Sunday, August 26, 2007; A01

The Democratic National Committee sought to seize control of its unraveling nominating process yesterday, rejecting pleas from state party leaders and cracking down on Florida for scheduling a Jan. 29 presidential primary.

The DNC's rules and bylaws committee, which enforces party rules, voted yesterday morning to strip Florida of all its delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver -- the harshest penalty at its disposal.

The penalty will not take effect for 30 days, and rules committee members urged officials from the nation's fourth-most-populous state to use the time to schedule a later statewide caucus and thus regain its delegates.

By making an object lesson of Florida, Democrats hope to squelch other states' efforts to move their voting earlier, which have created chaos in the primary structure that the national party has established. But the decision to sanction such a pivotal, vote-rich state has risks.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/25/AR2007082500275.html?hpid=topnews

[bbinacan]

35. Good

Campaigns are starting too early as well as primaries.

[IndianaGreen]

58. What's the name of those two shitty little states that always want to be first?

Wasn't one of them the one that gave us "Mister Electable" in 2004?

Their track record sucks!

Why should bigger states have to kow-tow to two small states with a proven record of voting for LOSERS?

[Lasher]

38. We need to conduct all state Primaries on the same date

The current system is bullshit.

[cali]

39. That's a truly terrible idea.

The only people who could possibly run would be those with hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on TV advertising. As it stands now, a relatively unknown candidate can go to NH, Iowa, and now S.Carolina and Nevada, and potentially win. Look at Carter in '76 or Clinton's 2nd place in NH in '92. Cutting retail politics out is NOT the answer. The DNC has revamped the calendar by moving S.Carolina and Nevada even closer to NH and Iowa, thus bringing much needed ethnic diversity into the mix. Let's see how it works.

[Lasher]

40. See, that's the problem

A relatively unknown candidate can go to NH, Iowa, and now S.Carolina and Nevada, and potentially win just as you say. That's not something good. It means someone I might know nothing about can be chosen by a relitively few people.

If you don't mind I would like for voters in all other states to be able to play a meaningful role in the process to select the Democratic nominee for president. I am unimpressed by the way the DNC is shuffling the schedule to improve their selection of who gets to have a voice in the primary. That decision should not be theirs to make.

I share your concern about money in elections, but continuing to cut most states out of a meaningful role in presidential primaries is not a good remedy.

[cali]

41. Yea, relatively few, but at least a representative few

and btw, nominees are always going to be chosen by a relative few. I vote in March, and that's just fine with me. Far, far better to have a system where someone without several hundred million buck can be heard. And just because you (or I) are not first, doesn't mean our votes are meaningless. I vigorously oppose a same day primary, and I support the DNC making the rules. That's their function.

[bemildred]

45. Well put.

The Democratic Party is supposed to be democratic, not plutocratic or oligarchic.

[moondust]

43. Good.

If the DNC does not build a frickin' impenetrable wall at the beginning of the election year there is no telling where this rabid one-upmanship will end.

[mbperrin]

44. Yes, let's have authoritarianism from the top.

Heaven forbid a little democracy break out. States and primaries need to be eliminated as well as the electoral college and direct national elections held. I'm personally tired of never getting to vote in a primary that matters. In Texas, one of the most populous states, so that NH can have overweening clout within the party.

[Trajan]

50. Society without SOME rules .....

Is mob rule ....

I am not one for a whole lot of rules ..... but there is no doubt that the party should do what it can to stop this escalating juggernaut ....

The 'One Up-man-ship' claim is valid, with a torrential cascade of 'me too's the likely scenario ....

I mean: Who DOESNT want to be first ? .....

I would point out that many of the strong contenders in Iowa or NH fail to win the nomination ..... so the notion that there is some automatic lock in these races is false ....

I have never lived in NH or Iowa ..... But I dont need to be first, and so I dont mind if they continue to be first .... SOMEONE has to be .....

[zara]

47. Bad idea to give New Hampshire and Iowa such power.

[Telly Savalas]

48. Then why is it good to hand off this power to Florida?

[moondust]

51. Power?

Iowa has 57 delegates (and is a midwestern state).
New Hampshire has 30 (and is a northeastern state).
South Carolina has 54 (and is a southern state).
Nevada has 33 (and is a western state).

Florida has 210 delegates.

New York has 280.

California has 440..

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/D-Del.phtml


Who really has the power - no matter when they cast their primary votes?

[lakeguy]

49. isn't the FL legislature GOP controlled?

[MiniMe]

59. Yes. Everbody is falling for the GOP spin

Blame the Florida GOP-controlled legislature, they knew the rules when they passed the date of the primaries.

[riona]

52. Can the DNC legally take away our right to vote?

Is this going to end up in court?

[ashling]

57. Why do states get to decide anyway?

I think that we should have the primary for the whole country at once, just like the general election.

[comtec]

63. it's one of the few things they were very specific about in the Constitution

That the States decide their own way how to divvy up their electorates
and the DNC has every right to refuse to accept them as parties are NOT laid out in the Constitution. The framers' idea was you'd simply have a bunch of guys who'd split up to take both sides of an argument as needed, and that there would be no parties, only people interested in the integrity of the republic.... LOL what idealists!

[demo dutch]

65. The whole primary fight is rediculous, we should a national primary!