I'm tired of being disenfranchised by my own party

[cosmik debris]

I'm not talking about rigged voting machines, hanging chads, or purged voter rolls. I'm talking about my own party de-valuing my vote to the point where I might as well stay home.

In November of next year I will be expected to go to the polls and vote for a Democratic nominee that I had NO VOICE in selecting. Voters in other states get to pick my candidate for me and they expect me to comply like a lamb being led to slaughter.

I do not need the Democrats of New Hampshire, Nevada, Iowa, and South Carolina to make decisions for me or to decide for me who I get to vote for.

Is it any wonder that so many states are permanently Republican when they are permanently shut out of the candidate selection? If the Democrats ever expect to take any southern states they have to stop treating us like step children.

If the Democratic Party wants my vote in the general election, first they need to give me a meaningful vote in the primary.

[pnwmom]

1. What state do you live in? I live in a caucus state where the primary

doesn't count for anything.

But I'm sure as heck not going to sit out the general election. It's bad enough that I'm cut out of a meaningful primary vote -- why would I want to give up a vote in the general as well?

[cosmik debris]

2. I live in Texas, a perennial red state

On one hand we are blamed for not being blue, on the other hand we are denied the democratic opportunity to decide who our candidate will be.

If the Party wants to win Texas, FIRST they need to give us a voice on who gets to be on the ballot.

[pnwmom]

7. So, is Texas a caucus state, too?

And no one blames you for being red, by the way. You just live there, you didn't paint it red.

[cosmik debris]

10. We have a primary election

But it doesn't matter because the candidate will be chosen before our election day. It will have no impact on the candidate selection.

[pnwmom]

61. I wouldn't be complaining if we had a real primary at all. HRC is not a

guaranteed winner. Things could still get shaken up a lot in this race.

[DURHAM D]

3. If you think that voting is for a party and not for yourself just stay home.

[cosmik debris]

6. And if you think

that was the point of my post, you need to read it again.

[DURHAM D]

13. If voting early in the primaries could turn a southern red state blue

why is South Carolina still a red state?

[cosmik debris]

16. I don't know what you are talking about.

I never said that early primaries could turn a red state blue.

[DURHAM D]

19. Go back and read your next to the last paragraph.

I am finished - goodbye.

[cosmik debris]

21. You need to study your grammar

That is not what I said at all. You twisted my words for your own argument.

With that lame spin, it is no wonder that you are finished.

[Forrest Greene]

20. Yeah, & Love It Or Leave It, Too

If you like voting so much, whyncha move to Russia?

[Myrina]

4. Interesting thing about that is ...

... Republicans also treat their constituents like children, and they seem to like being told what to think and do & march along happily with the daily memo.

Wonder why/where the difference came about from, and why the Dems seem to think their constituencies appreciate the same treatment?


:shrug:

[Sparkly]

5. "If the Democratic Party wants my vote in the general election,

first they need to give me a meaningful vote in the primary."

Now I've heard everything. :wow:

[cosmik debris]

8. You may be comfortable with other people choosing for you.

I'm not. I prefer to think for myself and to vote for myself.

[AnneD]

23. Thank you for your post...

I live in Texas too and I feel the same way. I think this is a contributing factor to our anemic Democratic party too. It use to be a strong force to be reckoned with-now it is just a toothless lion. I find the whole state of affairs disgusting. The DEM's need to come up with a strategy to do regional primaries. The needs and preferences of large parts of the country are being ignored (Dukakis would never have made muster-nor would half of the last DEM nominees). We need to hear from all the states. The way things are-some candidates are forced to wash out 3-4 primaries into the season. Maybe 4-5 regional super primaries would be a better option.

By the time it seems to come to Texas-the race is over, the candidate that I thought was the weakest has won and they are not worth shaving my legs and putting on makeup to go to the polls for.

[Sparkly]

63. That'd be lovely.

But it isn't that way, and I think it's silly to say "Unless 'they' give me what I want I'm not voting."

[cosmik debris]

64. You made that shit up. I did not say that. n/t

[Sparkly]

65. "If the Democratic Party wants my vote in the general election,

first they need to give me a meaningful vote in the primary."

[cosmik debris]

66. So why didn't you quote me accurately the first time?

Do you really need to misquote me for the shock value?

[Sparkly]

70. I did.

:shrug:

[cosmik debris]

72. Bullshit

"Unless 'they' give me what I want I'm not voting." is not an accurate quote. You are bright enough to see the difference aren't you?

[Sparkly]

74. You really want to keep going with this?

You said, "The first time." :eyes:

[cosmik debris]

75. I think we need remedial grammar lessons for this group

quotation marks: " " Indicates a quotation.

That's Junior High stuff. You should have been familiar with it.

[Sparkly]

76. This is getting comical.

"So why didn't you quote me accurately the first time?"

See post #5.

Then, I suggest you let it go. :rofl:

[cosmik debris]

77. You're right, I confused your BS with the BS from another poster

I apologize for the confusion.

[Sparkly]

79. That's okay.

It was fun.

[Connonym]

22. It sounds perfectly reasonable to me

Why shouldn't we all get an equal say on who gets the nomination? If it doesn't matter, why do you suppose states are pushing their primary dates forward?

[Sparkly]

62. Should should should

Life should be fair. It isn't.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. So what's your solution? A one-day national primary?

That would mean that the candidates would campaign only in the six biggest states, because if they carry them they get the whole ball of wax. That disenfranchises 44 states.

The small state primaries give all the candidates a chance to compete on a relatively level playing field, where Dodd and Kucinich can campaign as effectively as Hillary and Obama. Put all the emphasis on the six big ones, and the only candidates you hear from are those with the best corporate connections - in which case you are being disenfranchised as well.

And the early primary states don't DECIDE anything. They don't pull enough delegates between them to counterbalance just Texas by itself. If you don't like how things look after the early primaries, just work harder to see a different outcome in your own state.

That's what the rest of us do.

[cosmik debris]

15. You are ignoring the way things really work.

We have 8 candidates now.

After the first 4 states voice their preferences, we will have no more than 4 candidates.

You may say that they do not choose the candidate, but they do choose who the candidate will not be. And electoral votes don't have any impact on that process of elimination.

[TechBear_Seattle]

37. That is the candidate's decisions, not the party's

If a candidate looks at results of a few caucuses or a few non-binding primaries and decides to drop out of the race for lack of support, that is their decision, not the decision of the party. Blaming the party in this case is completely misguided.

[cosmik debris]

40. Perhaps I should have said

"Members of my own party" rather than "my party".

But the bottom line is that my vote is not as valuable as a vote in New Hampshire. And members of my own party are responsible for creating my second class vote.

[Frances]

17. Excellent post

However, I agree that a lot of people are unhappy with the present primary system. For that reason, we see other states moving up their primary dates.

One option is to have a national primary as NCevilDUer pointed out. That would be good for me because I live in a big state.

But I don't like that idea because it would just mean that the best TV commercials would determine the candidate even more than they do now.

There is no perfect solution, nor even a really good solution. I suppose some sort of rotating primary would work best. But I wouldn't want the primary to be just one geographical area of the country. The beauty of having had Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina as the first states was that you got geographical balance plus states small enough so that many voters had a chance to hear the candidates in person.

[Connonym]

25. I don't think that's necessarily true

People who care enough to go see candidates speak in person aren't the kind of voters to be swayed by a TV commercial. People who pick their candidate by a TV commercial are lazy and uneducated and it's not going to make a difference if they have the opportunity to see a candidate in person because odds are they won't bother.

In my personal Utopia there would be no paid political advertising. We have plenty of debates and there are plenty of other ways to find a preferred candidate. We'd have one national primary which would be counted nationwide as a whole instead of by state. The same thing for the final election, no electoral college, no winning by state just a national tally. Everyone getting one vote and every vote being counted equally without shenanigans like exit polls influencing the turnout or TV networks making the call on who the winner is.

[Frances]

41. I don't think you understand how hard it would be

for a person to actually hear the candidate in person if there was a national primary.

[sendero]

81. We have this thing called TV..

..live appearances are not necessary to campaign.

I agree with the OP. We've GOT to stop letting Iowa and NH fuck up our selection process.

[RaleighNCDUer]

83. But as I noted, TV costs a LOT of money -

therefore, those candidates who court the corporations with the deepest pockets (putting themselves in their debt) will be the ones that get seen. That's WHY we have the early, small-state primaries.

Myself, I favor a rotating primary system, keeping them in small states but allowing for a greater diversity of demographics - Arizona, NM, Nevada, with large hispanic populations; SC, Alabama, Louisiana, with significant black populations. Every region has a couple small, representative states that can be used to 'try out' candidates. But putting the early primary in big states is the same as having a one-day national primary - it completely disenfranchises the lesser states and slants the election to the most corporately acceptable candidate. As a progressive Democrat I will fight that tooth and nail, even if my mid-to-large state never gets an early primary.

[onenote]

11. do you think the repub primary system is somehow different

and gives everyone exactly the same say?

[cosmik debris]

18. I made no comment on the Republican system.

I have no desire to participate in the Republican nominating process. I do have a desire to participate in the Democratic nominating process. But that just isn't going to happen. I'm not allowed.

[onenote]

24. You suggested that the Democratic party primary system was why some states are repub

which suggests you think that folks in those states feel more empowered by the repub primary system than the Democratic party system. So, yes, you did actually make a comment on the repub system, albeit indirectly.

[cosmik debris]

26. Your inference is incorrect.

"which suggests you think that..." does not equal "you commented that..."

You are welcome to infer anything you want. But please don't blame me for your inferences.

[onenote]

28. Sorry I misunderstood. Maybe you can help explain it to me

You wrote: "Is it any wonder that so many states are permanently Republican when they are permanently shut out of the candidate selection?" If these, or other, states are "shut out" of the repub candidate selection why are some of these states "permanently repub"? Why aren't states that are shut out of the repub selection process permanently Democratic?

[cosmik debris]

31. Is it so difficult to read that in context?

When I spoke of the process of candidate selection I was not speaking of Republicans. No where in that post did I mention republican selection process. You made that shit up. Quit doing that!

This post was about Democrats, the Democratic party, and the Democratic Party's candidate selection process. If you want to talk about Republicans, this is not the thread for you.

[onenote]

33. Not sure why you are attacking.

You suggested that some states are permanently repub because the primary process shuts out Democrats in those states. I'm trying to understand why that is so, and why its not so that shutting our repubs works the same way. Its a legitimate question and i"m not sure why you're getting so defensive.

[cosmik debris]

38. I get the impression

that you are trying really hard to misunderstand and to take quotes out of context.

If you want to mis-characterize my posts, that is ok, but I will not attempt to defend your mis-characterization, validate your misunderstanding, or verify your rejection of the context.

Good luck with that.

[onenote]

47. I give up.

If you won't/can't engage in a discussion about this, there's nothing I can do.

[cosmik debris]

48. What more can I say

I told you that your inference was incorrect.

I told you that you took the sentence out of context.

I will not defend the straw man you created.

[sandnsea]

12. You can work for a candidate

You can contribute money, write letters, make phone calls. I won't get to vote for a primary candidate either, but it doesn't mean that my voice doesn't count. The vote is the least of what we should be doing politically.

[CK_John]

14. Why don't you run for some office then? n/t

[TechBear_Seattle]

27. You seem to misunderstand how presidential candidates are picked

Candidates for president are nominated at the National Convention. Candidates have never been nominated by the primaries or by the caucuses; all the primaries and caucuses have ever done is either select the delegates to National or designate how the state's delegation will cast their votes. That's it.

Case in point: the delegation sent by Washington State Democrats to the national convention has never -- not once -- paid any attention to the state presidential primaries. Delegates have always been apportioned based on the state party caucuses, held several weeks after the primary. If I want my voice to be heard when it comes to picking a presidential candidate, it is a waste of time for me to head to the presidential primary; I must go to the caucus.

Because the presidential nominee is picked by the Convention, and because it is now well-established law that the parties are private organizations with complete right of association, it would be unconstitutional to require a party to actually base their presidential pick on election results. (Candidates for offices other than President and Vice President are picked at the regular primaries, not by a convention; thus the law can and does obligate the parties to adhere to the results of the regular primaries.)

I understand and fully agree with your frustration, but keep in mind that voters in New Hampshire, Nevada, Iowa, and South Carolina are NOT making any decisions or nominating any candidate and never have. At best, they are stating a totally non-binding preference on how they want the state delegation to the National Convention to vote with regards to the presidential nominee.

[cosmik debris]

29. I understand all you are saying but,

see post #15

[Nedsdag]

30. "...first they need to give me a meaningful vote in the primary."

Well, you can forget about all that if Hillary is nominated.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[ChiciB1]

35. DING, DING, DING.... DONG!! I Live In Florida... I'm Not So Happy

myself! I mean after all the Iowa and NH primaries have been a main stay in the GE for years and years, and from all I've ever heard... the PRIMARIES do count!

And as it is, I feel completely left out!! And telling someone to run for office is just plain STUPID! If you don't have GOBS of money, you ain't got a chance in HELL!!

My county hasn't even found 18,000 lost votes from 2006 yet!! And I guarantee you that so much money has been spent on just contesting the results that it's laughable!!

[ieoeja]

52. You do know that Bill Clinton won neither Iowa nor New Hampshire in '92?

[madfloridian]

32. Oh, good grief. Why not just sue Dean and the DNC..everyone else is.

Bill Nelson is. He will take it all the way to teh Supreme Court. A Tampa activist is. The suit was dismissed but he says he will keep appealing. Heck a Florida senator is even planning on suing the first four states for being terrorist rogue states.

I am tired of pouty big states with Me First attitudes who think they are the only ones in the party.

[cosmik debris]

34. I am not a state, I am a person

Is it unreasonable for me to demand equality?

Should my vote count as much as one vote in New Hampshire?

[madfloridian]

36. There is Nelson v Dean, so make "you v Dean"....sue him and the DNC

for following the party rules which the states voted for. Let's spend all our money suing Howard Dean and the DNC while a certain candidate has built their own support base while no one noticed.

Sue Sue Sue.

[cosmik debris]

39. You really wear it on your sleeve don't you?

It is all about Dean. Every post that is critical of the party has to be about Dean. Sheesh???

I don't have the money to file a lawsuit, but I do have a voice to ask for equality. If you don't want me to have equality, I understand. I feel pretty much the same way about you.

[madfloridian]

42. The lawsuits will hurt us all. Ask where others are getting money to file?

Ask yourself that? Maybe Victor in Tampa is rich, maybe he is getting funded to file his lawsuit and keep on appealing though it was dismissed. Who pays for that?

Who is funding the lawsuit filed by Nelson and Hastings? Lawsuits cost money?

The old meme about my being all about Dean is worn out and very very out of date.

He is chairman of the party, Florida lied and said he was stealing our votes.

I am seeing a lot of whining when it was the fault of Michigan and Florida for breaking the rules.

They are acting like whiny babies.

[cosmik debris]

44. I'm not interested in a lawsuit.

But I am interested in finding a way to achieve equality.

If all you want to talk about is Dean and Lawsuits, this is not the thread for you.

[madfloridian]

45. Yes, because that is how a big state is solving it....suing Dean. It is the right place.

You are blaming the 4 early states. So is Florida. Carl Levin despises the four early states, but especially NH.

Talk to him. He is the one who got Terry McAuliffe to make a deal to set up the commission to make the rules...then his state broke them.

[cosmik debris]

46. I am not a state, I am a person

I am not worried about equality for Texas or Florida. I am not interested in a lawsuit.

I would like to achieve equality for ME and any other voter whose vote is undervalued because of situations we did not create. And I would like to do it without litigation.

If you want to talk about litigation, Dean, and big states, feel free to start a thread on that topic.

[yewberry]

80. "Should my vote count as much as one vote in New Hampshire?"

It does.

[madfloridian]

43. I just asked a good question. Who is providing the money for the lawsuts?

And why is the media only telling Florida's side inside of pointing out that Florida voted for the rules and then broke them?

[BigDDem]

49. Have you thought about moving to Iowa?

or New Hampshire?

I live in Texas too but I'm not nailing myself to the cross.

[cosmik debris]

50. That's a bit melodramatic.

I said I was tired of it and that I wanted a more just system. I never said I was bleeding to death.

And just because we both live in Texas doesn't mean we have to agree.

If you think that "love it or leave it" is the answer then you missed the point of my post.

Thanks for playing.

[BigDDem]

53. Who is the "they"

that expects you to comply "like a lamb being led to slaughter?"

Speaking of melodramatic.....

[cosmik debris]

54. Subject, object, verb. Remember your basic grammar?

Read the sentence. The pronoun reference was not unclear.

[ieoeja]

51. What the the Republicans doing different?

You just claimed that Texas is permanently Republican because Texans don't vote earlier in the Democratic Party's primary season. Given Texans vote no earlier in the Republican Party's primary season, I have to wonder why this would cause Texans to hate the Democratic Party, but not the Republican Party?

[cosmik debris]

55. You took that out of context.

I have already been through that.

[ieoeja]

58. I saw that after I posted.

However, a better reply than, "out of context," would be, "you're right. It was the wrong thing to say. I imagine Republicans in Texas are just as pissed at their party as Democrats in Texas are."

[BigDDem]

56. Perhaps you should stay home election day and have

your own pity party.
Oh, and may I suggest lamb chops for dinner....

[cobalt1999]

57. Lots of people are sick of it too.

In 2004 I had the choice of Kerry and...,well, Kerry.

Dean was long gone killed by the early states and the media before any large state had a chance to rescue him.

That is why I wish Florida had challenged this system in 2004 instead of waiting until 2008. Oh well, the system is breaking down and states are mutinying, so this may be the last time this unfair system is in place.

2012 will be much different.

[cosmik debris]

59. I've been through 12 presidential campaigns

I've watched it change through the years. It always seems to get worse, it never gets better.

[cobalt1999]

60. The current situation is about a rock bottom as possible.

Half the people in this country don't even get a chance to vote for their preferred candidate because the early states have torpedoed their candidates before we have a chance to vote them.

Dean might be president right now, if Florida had fought the system 4 years ago.

[RaleighNCDUer]

68. Nonsense.

It wasn't the early primaries that knocked Dean off - it was the DLC and the MSM joining hands with the republicans, so that Hillary would get a shot in 08. Just as the DLC is backing the rebellion of the big states against the DNC and Dean, again, because they don't want Edwards challenging Hillary, and Hillary and her corporate money are far more effective in the big states with mass advertising, than in small, face-to-face meetings.

[ChiciB1]

85. Your Words Ring "Truth To Me" And The Political Process Isn't

a process anymore... you either love it or leave it. If ANYONE has a difference of opinion about almost anything anymore, there will always be another who can't wait to post a NASTY reply!

Why it has to be so NASTY is something that really disturbs me and I found myself getting a bit snide for about two weeks recently. Now, I don't think I care much anymore! Maybe it's the past 6 plus years that has done this to us, but it sure isn't a Democratic Party I've ever known.

And I don't feel I can express any opinion without getting slapped for saying it. Something keeps running through my brain... Be Careful What You Wish For, ETC.

It makes me so very sad and useless at the same time.

[RaleighNCDUer]

67. You're 70 and haven't figured out how this works yet?

In that case, the problem is not with the party.

[cosmik debris]

69. Like I said:

"I've watched it change through the years. It always seems to get worse, it never gets better."

I know how it works now and how it worked in 1956. and how it worked in all interim elections. If you knew any history in this area you would know that it is not the same now as it was when Estes Kefauver won the nomination. Just blame our failed education system. Oh well. Study hard and you may recover.

[RaleighNCDUer]

78. I know that this system has been working this way since the 70s,

and was developed to take the process out of the smoke-filled rooms where the big shots and machine bosses decided who the nominee would be, shutting out all minorities and women. No golden age was ever golden.

And I also know that the little states do not decide anything. Not with the Democratic party. Now, the OTHER party does tend to march in lockstep after THEIR primaries, but they've always had a problem with democracy.

[cosmik debris]

82. correction

I said "when Estes Kefauver won the nomination."

I should have said "when Estes Kefauver sought the nomination.'

Sorry for the mistake.

[eridani]

71. Rotating regional primaries would be a good solution n/t

[Greyhound]

84. I like that idea. n/t

:kick:

[UGADUer]

73. The 50% in the US who never vote feel that way

Those of us who are political wonks have a responsibility to try to change that.

[redqueen]

86. I don't get it... because the candidate is decided... people stay home

instead of voting?

That just doesn't make any sense at all... *especially* after this nightmarish misadministration.

[Rowdyboy]

87. You're free to move to Iowa or New Hampshire. We all are....What's the problem?

Anyway, why should your vote be more "meaningful" than mine or anyone else's?