Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I'm from Michigan and I'm satisfied with the DNC decision.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 07:57 PM
Original message
I'm from Michigan and I'm satisfied with the DNC decision.
I'm seeing all this pissing and moaning about the decision today and I keep checking to see where the posters are from. Rarely do they seem to come from the states who were affected by this decision.

Well, I was affected and I believe it was the only way to fairly deal with the problems created by the local parties who tried to circumvent the rules.

So before you run up another post from your home in New York or Los Angelos or Houston, remember that there were real human beings who's voices were muted before this ruling but you were not one of them - I was.

I say thank you to the DNC for a ruling that was fair and just. I hope everyone joins me in saying the same.

Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's so good to know!
Thank you. Seems fair to me, too, from here in my caucus state :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sailor65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. I haven't decided yet.....
whether I'm happy about being included at all, or pissed to be only half a voter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
casus belli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. And you should definitely let your local party officials now how you feel
In the future, perhaps when the National party says, "do it and be stripped", states who might want a better position in the contest will know that they mean business. I'm not saying its fair to you, because it's clearly not. it wasn't YOUR decision, but someone made this decision on your behalf and I think you should give them hell for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
casus belli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. double post deleted
Edited on Sat May-31-08 08:26 PM by casus belli
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Any anger on that score should be directed to the people who caused this.
Starting with Debbie Dingell who orchestrated this mess. I have written to the local party leaders expressing my disgust with their underhanded methods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ossman Donating Member (883 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
3. Me too. Although not giving Obama any popular vote isnt fair, but its just an arguing point.
Delegates baby. I can confirm at least 1 person voted uncommitted for Obama. Me. And my wife is an Obama supporter who sat home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. The DNC can't assign a popular vote, only delegates.
I'm satisfied because I know that our vote will count and those who perpetrated this mess have been punished.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
7. It's good to hear from a state's own citizen.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lxlxlxl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
9. Carl Levin's point...
I think FL and MI should go first in 2012...why not? I hope the issues about timing and primary order fasttrack to a high priority that the party can deal with within the year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. No, they shouldn't, and there is a good reason why they shouldn't.
Edited on Sat May-31-08 08:30 PM by Spider Jerusalem
Retail politics.

Having the first contests in small states ensures that second- and third-tier candidates who may not have the funds to compete in large media markets have a chance to present themselves to voters, to campaign door-to-door, at small town meetings, rallies, etc; having states such as Michigan and Florida go first would make viability in the earliest nominating contests all about money, and that is not a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
casus belli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Exactly it. Although...
the system is in obvious need of tweaking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lxlxlxl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Great point...
I wasn't thinking a permanent first-time status though...Why not rotate it? 2012 could be a redress for this years mess?

Your definitely right about media buys...I didnt think about that. Too caught up in this year I guess.

One thing I would love to see after this whole election is over is where all the media buy money goes...that would be such a triumph for transparency, but it would also help prove the point that we desperately need campaign finance reform. Why should people support candidates so that TV/Radio/Print owners can get bigger checks every four years.

Think about what that list would look like...Each state can't have that many media outlets...Seeing the numbers would be great wouldn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-31-08 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I have always respected Carl Levin greatly, but he's wrong on this.
The local pols here keep trying to use the timing of the primaries as a way to draw attention to the state. That is the wrong way to do it. Levin is one of the most powerful policitians in this country and should be using that power to increase funding to our state instead of going along with these silly games thought up by petty power grubbers. He's better than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC