For all you against the revote, because "FL dems broke the rules"

[BzaDem]

Much has been made of the fact that the Democrats in the FL legislature voted 115-1 in favor of moving up Florida's primary. Well consider the following hypothetical scenario.

You are a Florida legislator. A bill did two things:

1. Institute a requirement for paper ballots, ending Diebold's control over national elections
2. Moved Florida's democratic and republican primaries to Jan 29th.

Furthermore, the Republicans (who dominated the legislature 2 to 1) refused to separate those two aspects into different bills. You had to either vote yay on both, or nay on both.

You knew that if you voted nay, electronic voting machines may again decide the presidential election in November.

Would you vote yay or nay, and why?

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. According to the record, they did it 'cause it's good for Florida

In the end, they figure they'll get more influence and campaign $$$. We'll see if it works.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. Voted for the bill and accepted the consequences for doing so.

This was not sprung on Florida's Democrats in any way, shape, or form. If they have complaints, they can address them with the people who forced them into that decision, aka Florida's Republicans.

[BzaDem]

4. So you would support state Republicans controlling which states count for our nomination?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. They obviously could do that anyway.

As you said, they're in the majority. And if you don't like it, blame Florida Democrats, whom actually made that trade.

[BzaDem]

9. Now we're going in circles. Would you vote yay or nay? Yes or No?

What would you rather have, eVoting machines, or a later primary?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

24. I seem to have already answered that question, did I not?

[trumad]

3. Play you pay

[Deep13]

5. However it happened, punishing the voters is the wrong thing to do. nt

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. Voters punished themselves in this case. nt

[Deep13]

14. legislators=voters?

The right to vote is pretty fundamental, akin to free speech and trial by jury. Action by the state cannot constitute a waiver on behalf of each voter any more than censorship laws can constitute a waiver of the First Amendment.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

23. They put Republicans in charge, did they not?

Furthermore, voting in a primary is a party sponsored action. The party chooses how it will selected delegates and voter involvement need not be included whatsoever. See: caucuses.

[Deep13]

32. wow.

I return to my original point. The idea that a party is somehow a private club has been abondoned a long time ago.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

50. Perhaps so, but you made a constitutional argument.

And constitutionally speaking, it's a private club with private rules.

[rocktivity]

44. Agreeing to the bill is what punished the voters

along with expecting the DNC to look the other way. I mean, if that's how DNC going to run things, why bother having one?

:headbang:
rocknation

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

51. I don't know, perhaps to ensure that we don't have 2012 primaries run in 2009. (nt)

[SoFlaJet]

6. you would have to vote "aye"

it was what we Floridians (the Democrats anyway) have been screaming about to our reps for 8 years. It was on the top of the list of things we wanted-a paper trail. As for the primary getting moved it was assumed that would work itself out. I hope that we get another chance to vote, because the first one I can tell you out of 6 voters in my family alone only 3 even bothered going, and that is another 3 Obama votes

[Benhurst]

11. Fixing the voting process was more important.

And I find it obscene that the "Democratic" party is punishing the voters. Surely there could have been some way the politicians could have been punished instead. Off the top of my head, why not take away the voting rights of Florida's super delegates?

[Exilednight]

10. I would vote nay. What good is it to remove a voting machine if no votes were going to count....

for your party's primary. They can not plead ignorance to the fact that they didn't know the DNC would punish them, in fact it was quite the opposite.

For arguments sake, let's say I voted yay. Then I would live with my decision of disenfranchising my voters in the primary in hope of creating a fairer election system for the GE.

With that being said, the question becomes; what is going to change for the 2012 primary?

[Saturday]

12. Good point zlt234. nt

[rateyes]

13. I would have voted "aye" and then accepted the consequences

of my actions, or I would have voted "no" and accepted the consequences of my actions.

[ellacott]

15. I didn't know that this was their only option

It would seem that the DNC should have considered the position that the Dem. legislators were in. It seems unfair to punish them for something that was out of their control.

If this is the case then Dean deserves some repsonsibilty for this fiasco.

[Zynx]

19. Indeed. The Democrats are in such a pitiful minority in Florida they really can't do anything.

[ellacott]

20. That is bad

I'm disappointed that more wasn't brought out in the press of the impossible choice that the Democrats had. I'm even more disappointed with the way the media is treating the Fl. Gov. and not pressing him on this point. It was his party that is overwhelmingly responsible for this situation.

[Zynx]

25. I just checked the numbers. The Florida HoR is 78-42 Republican.

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

The State Senate is 26-14 Republican.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Senate

They never would have had a chance regardless.

[joshcryer]

29. Yep, I knew they were outnumbered, I didn't know it was tagged on to another bill.

How completely dishonest of users here to imply that Democrats were "all for it"!

[ellacott]

36. I don't think it was dishonest as much as it was uninformed

I admit I was very uniformed. This is the first time I'm hearing about the other bill being attached. I never heard one word from the media regarding this. The pundits have been using this to claim that this is an example of the unorganization of the Dem party.

[ellacott]

55. This thread has been very informative

You're right they didn't have a chance.

[UALRBSofL]

16. OP that is what happened and because of that

I got the opportunity to vote with a paper ballot. People do not know all the issues other then they hear the democratic legislation voted with the republican legislation. However, there is a 2 to 1 margin in the FL legislation. Also, had they voted against the move, they would have lost the paper ballots and we would have had an issue voting with the Diebold machines. This is why I would like my vote counted. Also, people don't know the reason why our votes were stripped or why our delegates doesn't count. Donna Brazille, being a member of the DNC came in the middle of it and said, for your penalty were stripping you of everything, whereas the RNC stripped florida of only half. So, the penalty placed on the florida democrats was a DNC/Donna Brazille idea.

[Debi]

53. Had every Democrat voted against the bill you still would have been

able to vote with a paper ballot. With the republicans in control at such a high margin the bill was going to pass anyway.

Also, why do posters here keep citing RNC rules with regard to the DNC convention? Those are NOT our rules, why should we abide by them?

[stahbrett]

17. Would have voted NAY - the bill would have still passed, and I would be on record being against it

The DNC could have been told, "look, almost all Democrats voted AGAINST the move - the Republicans rammed it down our throats over our objections!". Then the DNC would have likely penalized the states less severely - probably along the lines of what the Republicans did.

[joshcryer]

45. You wouldn't have got the bill in there if you didn't have some sort of concession.

This is how it works. People add shit to bills for political capital. I need some money for my districts schools, I vote on a bill banning dildos or something.

Lesser of two evils type shit.

Had you voted no after compromising and telling them you would vote for it, good luck getting that *next* bill passed. Politicians have very long memories. Poor Obama got into the Senate and was wanting to confirm one of Bush's people, but he was told by the wiser democrats that to do so would fuck him later on, as they'd never forget it was him who wanted that.

[Debi]

54. Actually it's in the DNC rules that if the Dems would have tried to stop

it then they could have chosen a less sever penalty. The harsh penalty is because the Florida Democratic legislators laughed at the rules and went along with the republican majority.

[SoFlaJet]

18. here let Debbie Wasserman Schultz explain it to you

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/09/foxnews-sunday-debbie-wasserman-schultz-rejects-brit-humes-framing/

[madfloridian]

21. It was the fault of the Florida Democrats. Debbie is just wrong.

She is just in denial.

From instigator to victim. It was a Dem who introduced the early primary bill in Florida.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1829

How it began last August....how Florida Democrats began their propaganda war
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1819

Jeremy Ring (D-FL) said "relevance is more important than "partying" in Denver.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1836

[SoFlaJet]

22. We ALL demanded a paper trail for the last 8 years

since 2000-that was the highest of all priorities for me MFl-I wrote a bunch of E-mails to Wexler and Nelson and anybody else I thought could help. The fact is the only way we could get that passed thru the REPUBLICAN led legislature was to have that provision tacked on to a bill that moved our primary date-who friggin knew then that the DNC would punish US, the democratic voters of the state?

[joshcryer]

27. This is very enlighting, I knew it was more political than it seemed.

As usual the liars and distortionists will try to conjure up misinformation to disprove this simple fact.

[madfloridian]

40. You are making my head hurt from the propaganda.

Please stop it.

[elixir]

42. That's your response?!! AFter all the links you've duped on here and the ranting. You'r going

to say "your propaganda is making my head hurt"? This makes me wonder if your argument is a strong one. You say, I've worked too hard...we'll you dropped the ball on this post.

[joshcryer]

43. madfloridan doesn't want to admit the political reasons for it.

I said from the beginning that there were political reasons, this only proves it irrefutably.

[joshcryer]

26. I knew it was a political thing and not as cut and dry as some delusional people here would imply.

Basically it was a no-win situation, and the Democrats in FL cannot be said to have been voting on moving up the date any more than they can be said to enforce paper ballots.

[rocktivity]

28. I would have given EQUAL weight to the facts that

3. Moving the primary date would violate the DNC rules they agreed to
4. Violating the DNC rules they agreed to could strip them of their delegates.

And I would have voted nay because even if I hadn't been smart enough to expect that the Rethugs had a self-serving ulterior motive, I would not have put the needs of the opposition party first.

:headbang:
rocknation

[joshcryer]

31. They gave them a no-win situation. Vote nay, GOP manipulates the vote. Vote yea, GOP stops you...

...from being able to have a say in the primary.

And in the end the General Election is far more significant than the primary.

[rocktivity]

46. If they couldn't win, they shouldn't have played

Who are the Repubs to tell us when to have our primaries, anyhow?

:headbang:
rocknation

[SoFlaJet]

48. exactly right Josh

why is the best posts are always the shortest and get right to the heart of the matter?

[iamthebandfanman]

30. maybe they should work on getting more seats?

just a thought.


If i voted Yay, i woulda accepted i just broke party rules... not expect the rules to change for me...


regardless, i still so no revote and no delegates. for michigan or florida.

catch 22s suck, but what can ya do

[joshcryer]

33. No one expected it to be this close, I damn sure didn't.

Many here of course did, primarily Obama supporters. I can name two off the top of my head whose ideal scenario is it being down to the wire and MI and FL *not* being seated.

But as we can see, the politics aren't as cut and dry as the misinformation attempts to suggest. This is the *first* I heard that there was another bill tagged on to it.

[iamthebandfanman]

38. so whats michigans reason?

anybody know ?

atleast floridas makes sense and actually could be arguable.

[PassingFair]

34. Democrats did not HAVE to push their voting day up.

Alternatives were suggested, and Florida turned them down.

And Michigan could have had a caucus at ANY date.

This is smoke and mirrors.

[Nine]

35. I didn't know that. Thanks.

I haven't posted on the FL or MI primary concerns because I haven't really looked into it enough to know all the details. All I know is, if we lose those states in the general as a result of angering the voters, we are up the creek.

[Ganja Ninja]

37. I would have voted for it.

Getting a paper trail for the election in November is more important than whether or not your delegates are counted at the convention.

[suston96]

39. Don't know about your choices, but......

...I know one thing that happened: the Republican Party in Florida stuck it to the democrats once more. They have seriously divided the democrats nationally and have succeeded in aiding the Republican presidential candidate in Florida, if not in other states.

[spanone]

41. we were set up

[rocktivity]

47. Well, duh.

Did those FL Dems honestly think the Repubs were doing this out of the goodness of their hearts?

:headbang:
rocknation

[pampango]

49. Not against a revote, just against awarding delegates without a revote.

Life in a legislature is tough. Unrelated issues are often linked together for strategic reasons.

Nonetheless. votes have consequences.

[Debi]

52. Nay

The law would have passed anyway.

If there was back-lash from the second part of the bill I would have made it clear to my constituency WHY I voted the way I voted. (which would have been to guarantee them that their vote in the presidential primary would count with full knowledge that the republican majority would guarantee that their votes be properly recorded on paper ballots). Seems like a win-win