Anyone who would thwart the Democratic nominee over the FL and MI flap...

[CTLawGuy]

is selfish and a bully.

And I for one, and I hope others will agree, will not be intimidated by the Republican-style bullying tactics and threats to vote third party I have seen on this board.

Go ahead and vote third party, go vote in President Romney or Giuliani, it won't be on my head when they continue this war, and when they continue to erode the right to choose and stall universal health care. But I hope you vindicate yourselves. I hope you feel really good about yourselves for putting your self-interest over the good of this country.

You had the chance for 3 years to object to this primary system and you did nothing, but your states of MI and FL APPROVED the current rules. Now they are backing out, when for 3 years they said nothing.

So go ahead, make our day, you're the ones who have to live with yourselves.

[tokenlib]

1. Whoa there, things aren't that bad....

We're not going to have a groundswell of defections to the Repubs or a third party. We don't even have a nominee yet to thwart--however if there is a steamroller nominee--perhaps it will be good if they hit a few rocks before going all centrist on us. Some of us would like to have a say in all this before it's over.

This is an interparty squabble over who is going to be relevant in making decisions on the nominee. The "approval" of the current rules has not stopped the multitude of states trying to move up their primaries.

We all have self-interest!! Iowa and New Hampshire have done everthing in their power to maintain their primacy in the system--and that's ok. What about California waiting to get their foot in the door in June after it was all over.

This isn't going to be self-interest over the good of the country. This is a matter of the desire to be relevant, the desire to not get locked out of the decision making, and the desire to be respected. Michigan and Florida didn't start this rebellion--a lot of states have moved up--AFTER the rules were approved....

I say let Iowa and New Hampshire start in October at Halloween. Then we can have a candidate costume contest. It might stimulate turnout.

[LWolf]

2. Anyone who would consider the nominee

legitimately and fairly chosen by Democrats in the current system is an enabler of dysfunction.

I understand why some states are setting earlier and earlier primaries. They want a voice. They don't want a "frontrunner" crowned after one caucus and one primary from 2 small states out of 50.

Once the "frontrunner" is announced, the rest of the candidates are relegated to the back of the bus by the media, by many voters, by donors. That's not "democratic."

Selfish? Some of us might consider those of you with early primaries to be selfish, at the least, for assuming that we will allow you to choose the nominee for us.

My primary isn't until May 20th. I expect the nominee to have been unofficially crowned by that time. Why the HELL should you expect my vote in the general election for someone that I was excluded, for all but symbolic purposes, from choosing?

Expecting democratic principles to be upheld is not "selfish." It's not "self-interest," it's in the best interest of the nation and the planet.

If you are really concerned about the issue, how about supporting constructive change? How about writing the DNC and lobbying for no counting of votes, or publicizing exit polls, until the last vote is cast?

Then the dates of the primaries wouldn't matter, and they could be spread out. No one would have been eliminated or marginalized by early returns. Every vote would be equal. THAT's democratic.

So, how about it? Are you up for a solution, or are you just getting your blame game on?

[madfloridian]

3. There are 4 small states now...two diverse in population

So why do they keep referring to only two?

Did you read Brazile's op ed? Changes are in the works.

"As we begin to contemplate the calendar for 2012, and the rules that will govern that process, both major parties must craft a system that makes sense for voters and candidates. We can begin by setting a reasonable starting date -- I suggest the time when the snow gives way to tulips and daffodils. We can make sure the nominating schedule does not unfairly favor the rock stars of politics. And we must make sure the campaign finance laws allow more than just the candidates with deep pockets and ties to big donors to be competitive.

Perhaps by 2012 both major parties will commit to reforming the nominating process to give as many people as much of a voice as possible. We're long overdue for a rational system to elect a president of the United States."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/31/AR2007083101427.html

[LWolf]

4. I'm glad that changes are in the works for 2012.

Of course, if we win in '08, our nominee is pretty much guaranteed for that one, lol. Once we get past '08, that gives us until 2020 to have a better system in place.

I don't know what the answer is for '08. I can see all sides, and I don't see an easy answer, especially at this late date.

I would like to see the states in question and the dnc at least talking to each other. I don't want anyone's vote marginalized for any reason.

Is it too late to decide to hold off counting votes until the polls close for the last primary? That seems like the way to go.

[madfloridian]

5. Dean has been working with Florida a lot. They lied about that.

He has been talking about it since January at least with them. They had an agenda and they pursued it and worked with the Republicans. If they had been honest I would not have been so outraged.

The DNC will not give in, they can't. Those two states knew that. It was basically a power play to keep the party power for the nominee. Now THAT needs to be changed...IMHO...that one nominee gets to be in total control of the whole party.

Too hard to get change that way.

I wrote this up a lot in my journal this week, and there is no doubt Florida used propaganda and Michigan as well did a power play.

[LWolf]

6. I believe that.

I hope a way can be found to settle this fairly, for all candidates and voters in those states.

[jmp]

7. I can live with myself just fine.

...