The typical conversation I've had with people who STILL insist my vote shouldn't count at all

[Tommy_Carcetti]

(I posted this as a reply on another thread, but it really deserves its own post.)

This is the same stupid argument I get over and over and over again.

I say, "Count my vote."

They say, "No."

"Why?"

"Because Florida broke the rules."

"Who broke the rules?"

"Your state leaders."

"So I didn't break the rules then?"

"No, but your state leaders did."

"Then why am I getting punished?"

"Because Florida broke the rules."

"But you just said it was the state leaders who broke the rules."

"Yes I did."

"So why am I getting punished for something they did and I couldn't control?"

"Because they broke the rules."

"So why didn't the DNC punish them instead?"

"Because it has to make sure its rules are followed."

"But all the voters did was vote. Why are they the ones getting punished?"

"Because the DNC has to make sure its rules are enforced."

"Yes, I know that, but the ones to have the rules enforced against are the state leaders, not the voters. The voters did nothing wrong."

"They voted. They shouldn't have voted in a primary that wasn't going to count."

"So if the voters hadn't voted, then they wouldn't be punished."

"No."

"That doesn't make any sense. Either way under that scenario, the vote's not going to count."

"Exactly."

"So the voters are the ones who are getting punished?"

"Well they should be angry at their state leaders."

"But are the state leaders the ones who decided the votes shouldn't count?"

"No."

"Who decided the votes shouldn't count?"

"The DNC."

"So then shouldn't I be angry at the DNC?"

"No. You should be angry at your state leaders."

"Why should I be angry at my state leaders when it is the DNC who decided my vote shouldn't count?"

"Because they broke the rules."

"And if I were to be angry at my state leaders, then would my vote count?"

"No."

"Then why should I bother being angry at them if the DNC isn't going to count my vote anyways?"

"Because they broke the rules."

"So what should I do about it?"

"You can vote them out of office."

"Why?"

"Because they broke the rules."

"So if I vote them out of office, then will you count my vote?"

"Of course not. The primary election will be long over by then."

"So what's the point of that?"

"To punish them for breaking the rules."

"Yes, but why am I, as a voter, who simply had the audacity to go to the polls on the only day I could have possibly voted in the primary election, being punished by the DNC right now?"

"Because Florida broke the rules...."

[SoonerPride]

1. So, what you're saying is Florida is more important than the other 49 states.

Fuck that.

[MonkeyFunk]

15. So what you're saying

is Iowa and New Hampshire are more important than the other 48 states?

Fuck that.

[Coexist]

17. did Iowa and New Hampshire APPLY for early primaries? did FL?

[SoonerPride]

23. The process and schedule was voted on and agreed to by all states

The early dates for Iowa and New Hampshire wasn't decided upon by some authoritarian decree.

It was agreed upon by the party as a whole.

That is why any state who then violates the schedule is punished. Because they are putting themselves above all others, saying they are more important.

It's called anarchy. And it cannot be tolerated.

[boston bean]

143. both Iowa and NH broke the schedule set by the DNC. nt

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

153. FL and MI voted on the wrong day. Try that in the General Election in Nov

and see what you get.

What if the other 48 states went first and left you last?

[SoonerPride]

183. "But we wanna vote when WE want to. Screw your rules!!"

waaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh

[Tommy_Carcetti]

196. I just want my vote to count for something. That's it.

I really don't care when my primary is held one way or the other. I voted in my 2004 primary after Kerry was long cast as the presumptive nominee. As long as my vote was represented at the convention, I was fine with it.

The dispute as to when the primary was going to be held was strictly a debate between the DNC and the Florida state party. The ordinary Florida voter had absolutely nothing to do with that debate. They are not to be the ones punished.

[PassingFair]

337. Then put pressure on your reps to hold a caucus.

It can still be done.

Unfortunately, your "primary" was invalid.

As was mine here in Michigan.

[VotesForWomen]

236. case you didn't know, everybody votes on the same day in the GE. it's called equality.

[SoonerPride]

238. I don't. I mail my ballot in two weeks earlier. Thanks.

I appreciate your input.

[DemBones DemBones]

310. Why be obtuse? nt

[DemBones DemBones]

309. Which Florida and Michigan voters deserve. COUNT ALL THE VOTES!!!

How can we claim to be a Democratic Party if we're throwing out votes because a Republican-controlled state legislature set the primary earlier than King Howard wanted it to be?

[PassingFair]

336. You forgot South Carolina and Nevada....

Which will ROTATE to two other states next election.

EVERYONE can't go first.

Florida DID NOT CARE whether their delegates were
seated or not. They WANTED TO GO FIRST, no matter
the cost. Their delegates were stripped BEFORE the
vote because of it.

Fuck THAT!

[SteelPenguin]

57. No that's not what he's saying

he's saying that he shouldn't be held responsible for the choices of the people he's given legal authority to make such.

[iamjoy]

135. Irrelevant

We are just as important. The voters in Florida have just as much of a right to have their votes counted as voters in the other states.

The point is not who is most important, it is whether it is right for the DNC to impose collective punishment on the voters of Florida for something their state legislature and party leaders did.

[SoonerPride]

181. Well, since all the other states agreed to punish violators, yeah it's right

duh

ALL the states agreed to rules. They agree to punish anarchy.

It's called democracy.

Look into it.

[VotesForWomen]

237. no; YOU'RE saying that some privileged states should be allowed to go before others.

[Heathen57]

321. As was agreed to by all the states as well

as the DNC.

The only right way would have been to have a re-vote paid for by the state party since they were the ones who decided they were too good for the rules.

As it stands now the votes are skewed. Obama wasn't even on the ballot in MI. No way would that be fair to him.

Of course being a Hillary supporter, you care nothing for fairness and democracy in an election she is running in.

[Freedom Train]

257. At least as important.

And when it comes to the GE, yes, more important. Hasn't recent history taught you anything?

And Obama can forget about winning it in the GE now, after having essentially said "fuck you" to the Floridians.

Just another one in a long line of reasons why Hillary should be our nominee. We need to carry Florida in the GE, and Hillary can do it. Obama? Hah!

[jasmine621]

327. FL was MORE important than the other states in 2000. nt

[Coexist]

2. the concept of representative democracy should be introduced into that scenario

you do understand that your elected representatives make rules and laws that you have to follow, don't you?

[SteelPenguin]

54. This was my response in the original thread

As well as the response of another poster, to which we have yet to receive a reply. This long response indicates a lack of understanding of how representational democracy works.

[Coexist]

61. delete - wrong spot!

[SteelPenguin]

67. delete - no worries

That response totally confused me. heh.

[Coexist]

81. sorry - I was responding to a different post...

:blush:

Yes, you are correct.

[uponit7771]

3. You didn't vote for the state leaders? Jus askin. Thx

[newmajority]

41. Actually, that's a good point.....

As long as Florida keeps electing people like Bill Nelson and Debbie Wasserman Shit For Brains, they're going to get corrupt DLC backstabbers trying to game the system for their own benefit, and screwing the people as a result.

[cliffordu]

105. LOL" Debbie Wasserman Shit For Brains"

:rofl:

[Tommy_Carcetti]

111. Big bad Nelson and Wasserman-Schultz are on congressional committees

If what they did was supposedly so loathsome, go ahead and strip them of any titles they might hold there. I honestly don't care one way or another.

Just don't f__k with my vote.

[sandnsea]

4. You shouldn't want your vote to count

YOU shouldn't want a vote without a campaign to count. Just like the voters in Michigan shouldn't want a vote without the opponent on the ballot to count. It's called integrity. Get Some.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

60. Why should I not want my own vote to count?

:wtf:

That is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard on this board. Ever.

[SteelPenguin]

72. You'd want your vote to count in an acknowledged illegal election?

Hey, rules were broken, people weren't allowed to campaign, in one case the candidates names weren't even on the ballot, but hell it's still valid?

You should want your vote to count, but 'your vote' should also by default also indicate a fair and legal election process.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

85. Illegal?

As in I get to vote as many times as I want? Or I get to stand over the shoulder of other voters and tell them who to vote for, and if they don't vote for who I want, I can beat them up?

Damn, I missed that part of it all.

:sarcasm:

[SteelPenguin]

89. Ah so you get to choose which rules are followed?

I didn't know that we could pick and choose the rules by individual preference. I missed that part.

Florida, ie the Florida Representaives, ie the Florida people broke the party rules by moving their election forward.

Nice Strawmen though.

[cliffordu]

109. DING DING DING We have a winner!!! That's exactly right.

[sandnsea]

82. Integrity - it was a phony election n/t

[Tommy_Carcetti]

88. Phony elections are run by the supervisor of elections and certified by the Secretary of State?

That's a new one.

[sandnsea]

92. Yeah, in 2000 too, whoda thunk it n/t

[truebrit71]

148. Are you suggesting that the 2000 FL election WASN'T phony?

Wow...haven't heard THAT from a Democrat before....

[babylonsister]

5. How do you justify all the voters in FL who DIDN'T vote because

they knew their vote wouldn't count? Is yours more important than theirs?

[Maribelle]

21. Well, they believed Kerry's lies on CNN election eve then. The votes were counted.

You know, had Kerry not attempt to dissuade voters to vote on election eve I might not have the contempt for him that I do today. Had he simply said the truth, that the DNC will not seat the delegates, then he would have at least been honest. But Kerry was not alone. Most Obama supporters were attempting to hoodwink voters into not voting on primary day in the same manner.

However there were important issues on the ballot besides the presidential preference - issues important to all Floridians. And there was a wide-spread campaign in Florida to inform all voters that their votes would count, and how important their vote was. The tax payers paid millions to have each Supervisor of Elections send out sample ballots so that voters could see for themselves the issue on the ballots. Every single major news outlet in Florida stressed how important the vote was and that they would be counted. The Governor of Florida stated clearly before the election that the DNC had no say in the popular vote in Florida, but had every right to not seat the delegates at their own peril.

It was a blatant lie that the votes would not count.

[babylonsister]

38. Yawn. I'm so sick of people blaming everything on Kerry.

Sure, it's all his fault. :eyes:

[Bake]

125. I don't blame THIS on Mr. Reporting For Duty.

Just everything else. What a fucking loser. Maybe he can just go somewhere at windsurf. Or ski in the Alps and hit a fucking tree.

Bake

[Splinter Cell]

246. Fuckin' bullshit

I'm so fucking tired of people bitching about John Kerry. Who exactly would you have nominated in 2004? Dean? That was McGovern waiting to happen all over again. Clark? How many states did he win in the primary? Edwards? I like Edwards but he just plain ass doesn't win. Kucinich? Don't make me laugh.

John Kerry was a good fucking candidate, and he won the goddamn election. Even if you don't believe that, he got half the country to vote for him against an incumbent president in a time of war, no small feat. He won, and was fucked over like Gore, yet so many democrats (many of whom thought he was great four years ago), want to talk about how he was a loser. Fuck that.

Another thing people keep bitching about is "why did he give up?". He didn't have A DAMN THING to turn this election around. NOTHING. So, instead of destroying his reputation, he decided to be and adult and let it go. If he had a smoking gun he would have used it, you can bet on that.

The biggest problem our party seems to have, and we have it every election year, is we can't unite ourselves. Someone is always hanging on to some bitter feelings because their choice didn't make it. The Clinton camp is a prime example.

[northzax]

22. people who choose not to vote

don't get to complain about the results. seems reasonable to me.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

29. They chose not to exercise their right to vote at their own peril

As for myself and over a million other Democrats, we realized we had one chance to vote in this primary election, and promptly and properly exercised our right to vote.

Hardly punishable behavior.

[babylonsister]

46. So the hell with Floridians who were disenfranchised? You got yours?

I imagine if the primary totals were equal for all candidates, we wouldn't be hearing about any of this.

It's going to be interesting to see how and if this is resolved to anyone's satisfaction.

[Jersey Devil]

96. Actually, you have no "right to vote" in a primary election

If it were a general election you'd be right, but a primary election is simply a political party's chosen device for picking its candidates. There is no "right to vote" in a primary. There is no right to a primary to begin with. A political party can choose its candidates any way it wants. If the party wanted to choose its presidential candidate by flipping a coin it could do it so long as it was within party rules. Some states choose caucuses, some choose primaries, but all must abide by the rules of the parent organization, the DNC.

[mbperrin]

156. And this is the DNC that adopted the current plan in 1972 under

George McGovern, and has won exactly 3 races for the Presidency since then, while the Pubs have won 6. Great plan with great results. Gives me great confidence in the party leadership.

I belong to the party of inclusion, and I despair at the authoritarian actions of the current "leadership" of this party. I vote the ticket, what else can I do?

But too many years, I've got to hold my nose, and this year, the process is worse than usual.

Perhaps it's time to rethink what we're doing. After all, from 1932-1968, before the McGovern group set the new rules we have now, we won 8, while the Pubs won 2.

Hmmm.....

[skipos]

6. It has been a little different for me

I was told "your vote won't count towards delegates." I understood why. My state leaders played with fire and broke the rules.
We had our faux vote.
Now Hillary Inc wants to tell me "Surprise! Your vote is going to count towards delegates, even though you and the rest of MI were told otherwise."

I don't like being tricked, no matter how much it benefits Hillary.

[BlooInBloo]

7. Yes, you didn't do anything wrong, the state leaders of your party did. It does suck.

[SteelPenguin]

62. It absolutely sucks

This is one thing that I think gets missed. Nobody is claiming it doesn't suck that the voters of Florida and Michigan got screwed. They should be livid. They just need to take their frustration out on the correct people, their elected representatives.

[BlooInBloo]

201. Precisely.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

202. But "taking out their frustration" does nothing towards getting one's vote to count

That's at issue here.

Not the order of primaries. That was an internal party debate between national and state officials.

This is about getting some effect behind our votes.

[SteelPenguin]

211. I feel your pain I really do

If your vote counts in any way it's gonna be a bs one that only appears like it at this point.

Fair and legal elections REQUIRE rules in order to exist. There can't be anarchy. It's all about the rules. Your state broke them. It's as simple as that. They didn't have to. They were warned. They pussed out of changing the rules back, and the republican party down there helped fuck you as well.

It totally 100% sucks ass. No question about it. We can't invite anarchy though. If you value your vote, which you should, then you shouldn't be fighting for this particular vote to count.

If you want to direct anger at the DNC, have it be focused towards developing a better primary system where a wider variety of states have better representation in choosing our candidates. As far as this vote goes, your anger should be directed at the Florida government and nobody else. Your vote was stolen, yes. By them.

[WeDidIt]

8. You are responsible for electing your state leadership

ergo, you suffer when they break the rules.

Don't like it? Vote 'em out.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

63. OP point proven. n/t

[SteelPenguin]

74. Not really

your OP misses the point. Do you really not understand how representational democracy works?

[WeDidIt]

93. Actually, OP point countered

We live in a Democratic Republic. This means we have representational democracy.

The OP is responsible for the situation he is in because he allowed the current leadership to be the current leadership. The consequences of his decisions in who would be the party leadership in Florida were he would lose any opportunity to contribute to the choosing of the Democratic nominee.

Ergo, the OP is 100% responsible for what happened. Not me, not you, not Howard Dean, and not the Democratic PArty. The OP is responsible along with his fellow Floridian Democrats.

[madmom]

102. What about the ones who didn't vote for the current leadership?

[WeDidIt]

108. Choosing not to choose is still a choice

Not voting for the current leadership is not enough if the current leadership is who won. You must also become active.

We are all responsible for the actions of George W. Bush whether we voted for him or not because we all had the opportunity to attempt to convince enough people to vote against him in 2000.

[madmom]

171. sorry I'm not buying that, I am NOT responsible for anything bush does,

I worked my ass off and he still got in,and not because of me.

[WeDidIt]

243. That doesn't matter worth a damn

Soldiers didn't vote for Bush, too. Soldiers still ahve to go fight and die in Bush's war.

Elections have consequences and failing to get people into party leadership during party elections resulted in idiots who broke the rules ruining it for everybody.

That's how it works. Don't like it? Vote the bums out.

[wileedog]

114. By your logic, if I get ordered to go to Iraq

I shouldn't have to go because it was not my idea.

Hey, my 'elected' official decide to invade, why should I be punished?

[lojasmo]

9. Your delegates are being punnished. Your vote was counted. EOM

[NC_Nurse]

10. If you're so worried about YOUR vote, why not move to Puerto Rico?

I bet the climate is similar to Florida's and their primary is in June. Plenty of time to register...:-)

[AllexxisF1]

11. As a Floridian.....

I will make it easy for you.


As a voter in Florida we should have been paying more attention to what was going on at the state level and should have fought tooth and nail to have them NOT move the Florida primary.


There's your answer. You have any others?

[Maribelle]

39. We? Just because you might not have, don't you dare use the 'we' lie.

[kevinbgoode]

99. I live in Illinois, and I'd like to know why MY vote doesn't count in Florida too. . .

After all, the Democrats in Florida seem incapable of getting rid of the right-wing-dominated state legislature and their con-servative governor. Why shouldn't MY vote be counted in Illinois to help get rid of those Florida legislative creeps?

What. .. rules? Well bullsh*t. If I could help vote to get rid of Republicans, my vote should be counted ANYWHERE and ANYTIME I want, because I should decide on my own what rules apply to me.

[AllexxisF1]

198. Oh so you were fighting for it not to be changed.

Good for you, then apparently you should not need any explanation on how this has NOTHING to do with Obama or Howard Dean. It has EVERYTHING to with Florida's State Legislature.


Glad we cleared that up.


So why exactly is Hillary going against her pledge not to have those places counted.


Oh that's right she has no morals.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

90. Well, apparently you were paying so much attention and showed so much outrage against state leaders

And the DNC still won't count your vote.

So great job there being outraged. Yeah outrage!

[Sancho]

252. As a Floridian, you were wasting your time to "fight tooth and nail"

The GOP was interested in moving the date, a constitutional amendment, etc. The wanted an early primary for their own reasons and the Florida state legislature was going to move the date even if all the Democratic representatives voted against it anyway.

It is not that I like Nelson, but there was nothing that the Florida leadership could have actually done.

[Heathen57]

323. I seem to remember that there was an exception

in the rules that if the leaders fought against the change and were overruled by repubs, that the delegates would still be allowed.

However since only 1 dem voted against the change, it looks like they were all in favor. They did try to oppose the change and even laughed about it.

That blows your excuse right out of the water. You are going to have to find another excuse to pin the blame on anyone but where it squarely where it belongs - your reps in the party.

[Sancho]

324. You must not live here...you are simply wrong.

The primary was not just a primary. This state has had 8 years of Jeb and was facing a constitutional amendment that changed taxes (for schools, etc.). If the democrats had NOT been at the primary, they also would miss a vote on several important constitutional amendments that were purposefully scheduled for the same date. That was part of the reason that getting democrats out to vote that day was also important. The primary date would not change.

My local Democratic representative told me that he would rather have voters present to vote to support schools (and also participate in a primary) rather than miss the vote on the tax referendum and ALSO miss a primary that that the GOP would schedule at their convenience anyway.

Sorry, but your battleship just got sunk.

[Heathen57]

325. You don't get what I am talking about

whether it is on purpose or not I'm not sure.

The FL primary could have ended up earlier and the delegates would have counted IF the Democrats would have put up any kind of resistance to the move. One Dem voting against the earlier date doesn't count as resistance.

You reps at the state level were all for the change in spite of knowing that the DNC would sanction them. It was Clinton style arrogance that led them to believe they were above the rules.

If the arrogant attitude had not been so blatantly displayed, if they had tried to put up any resistance to the repubs, there would have been no problem. So you should be blaming the state reps. Obama and Clinton both supported the rules, only Clinton flipped flopped when she saw she needed the votes.

I fully expect that the FL and MI delegates will be seated, but only after the nomination is done. You are just looking for an excuse to hate Obama.

And no, I don't live in Fl. I live in a state that Clinton stated doesn't count and couldn't spend her time to stop in.

[Sancho]

332. No, you don't understand...

The national DNC Florida leaders are the "bad guys", but the local state representatives were looking at package legislation (that moved the primary date) and had very important constitutional action attached to the same voting date. Some of the votes were very close and very important.

Most of the Democratic STATE representatives were very concerned at the effects of state-wide tax changes, AND RIGHTLY SO! Despite the turnout, the Democrats barely lost the most important amendment, and we now have school cut backs, insurance crisis, etc. A primary 2 years away was not as important at the time as the consequences of the GOP controlling the $'s.

IF a few more Democrats had turned out for the primary, we'd have a much better tax base in Florida. Not only is Florida being punished for "showing up to vote", but also there are many who are bitter that not having a primary campaign here cost us the tax referendum. As such, Florida may go for McCain in November.

Remember that it doesn't matter who the candidate is nor what date the primary occurred IF you lose and put McCain in office!

This was VERY bad strategy by a few Florida leaders and ALSO stupid of the DNC to go after a state that may swing the election (again). It would have been smart to realize what was happening and dealing with it.

It was not possible to say that simply "opposing the primary date" was the right thing to do. The date was part of a lot of considerations.

[Heathen57]

335. That still doesn't explain why

the didn't protest in the least about the change in the date. They were all for it and were joking about making any kind of protest. Not even a token defense.

In their arrogance, they thought that the rules from the DNC didn't apply to them. That they are so self-imporant to think they could break the rules that everybody else had to adhere to.

As I said before they will most certainly be seated, just that they will have no real influence in the nomination.

Your tax issues were certainly very important, but why couldn't they have at least raised a stink about moving the date? That alone would have saved the entire mess. It seems to me that they were just too arrogant to do so.

[bobbert]

12. Yeah, it sucks but every news media said it wouldn't count before you voted

most people paying any attention to the primary knew at least a week ahead of time that your vote wouldn't count toward delegates. If you voted, then you voted for state & local primaries, not for the presidential primary and all of your votes for those offices will count :)

[Maribelle]

13. My Floridian neighbor who voted for Obama got a call for money from Obama's campaign.

She told me she said to them "get our votes to count and then we can discuss a donation".

He responded with "well then you're giving McCain an advantage".

She was truly livid that the man tried to use "fear mongering" to get her to donate to Obama - - and then told me she would never vote for Obama again, never mind give him a donation.

And then added "How could they do that to me on Mother's Day no less".

[chascarrillo]

18. On Mother's Day? OMFGWTF!!!!

Some interesting logic at play there. But then again, I'm an elitist.

[Maribelle]

26. Ask the Obama campaign how many women in Florida they called on Mother's Day.

That should be freaking easy to debunk if it is not true. Go ahead and do it, hero.

[chascarrillo]

31. By the way, what did you do to try to convince your neighbor to vote for Obama in November?

Huh, hero?

[Maribelle]

Better yet - - what did the caller from Obama's campaign do?

[AllentownJake]

51. Support us so we can beat McCain

I hope he doesn't continue that divisive message into the GE..:sarcasm:

[Maribelle]

56. Perhaps the message was: we don't care about you now - but we need you later.

[Maribelle]

48. sorry- dupe post

[stillcool]

19. A call for money?

are you sure your friend wasn't making shit up?

[Maribelle]

25. Right - insult the integrity of my neighbor. That'll work .

[AllentownJake]

27. I've donated since September

I've never been called for a donation.

[Maribelle]

34. It should be easy to disprove - ask the Obama campaign how many women in Florida they called Sunday.

And then ask them if they did nor did not use the pomp about an advantage to McCain.

[AllentownJake]

42. Why don't you give them a call

Its not my job nor do I have any interest to call the Obama campaign to dispel crazy rumors spread by some upset Hillary supporter who wants to slime the democratic nominee on the internet.

[Maribelle]

44. Oh? You would just rather insult the integrity of others? Yes or no?

[AllentownJake]

49. I don't give a crap

what the hell your selling at DU today. I don't have to dispel your integrity your avatar does it for me.

[Maribelle]

52. Nice.

[goletian]

168. lol, ouch. very ouch.

[AllentownJake]

187. No quarter

till surrender.

[stillcool]

59. If neither you, nor your

neighbor is a liar..you should call the police. Sounds like he/she is the victim of a con.

[endarkenment]

53. Why exactly is Mother's Day taboo for campaign calls?

[newmajority]

138. BECAUSE HILLARY IS A MOTHER !!!1!!1!!!!!

AND YOU GODDAM OBAMABOTS SHOULD KNOW BETER THAN TO DISRESPECKT A MOTHUR LIKE HILLERY BY CALLING A MOTHUR ON MOTHURS DAY AND TELLING HER SHE SHOULD VOTE FOR BAROQUE HUSSEIN OSAMA!!!1!!!!!111!!!

/Hillbot rubber room mode

[endarkenment]

142. exactly what I was thinking.

[salbi]

14. Nominee is often picked before voting in later primary states

There have been many years that the nominee was pretty much picked by the time voting in my state took place. It happens to many states, and I have felt and I'm sure many more have felt they were robbed of a vote because of it. It happens. This year FL and MI voted early and lost their votes, but would it have been any different if their primaries were last and the nominee was already chosen. I know it's not the same, but the feeling that your vote doesn't count exists in both situations and you just hope next primary you'll get a chance.

[chascarrillo]

16. What about the people who didn't vote because they knew it wasn't a valid election?

Should we all say "whoops, our bad - it actually counts!"

Living in Washington, which had a caucus (which determined delegates and which I attended) and a primary (which did not determine delegates and which I did not vote in), I would be extremely pissed if all of a sudden it was decided that the primary should count after all.

[Skink]

36. In Texas both the primary and Caucus votes counted toward delagates.

which is how we now know OBama actually won Texas. Took a month to tally it. Cut into Siestas.:boring:

[CK dexter]

20. It's Government 101, not rocket science: something called "representational government"

"So I didn't break the rules then?"

"No, but your state leaders did."

"Then why am I getting punished?"

Representative democracy isn't direct democracy. So yes, you are, to a degree, responsible for your representatives' mistakes.

I don't like this fact about our system either, but direct democracy is a practical impossibility on a large scale. One of the ugly consequences of this is that we are all, to some degree, responsible for Bush's mess in Iraq.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

79. Actually, it's called "collective punishment."

And it's a fallacy.

If you have a family member who is charged with a crime, does the entire family then go to jail? I mean, I'm sure somewhere at sometime along the line, we could have told the culprit to change his wicked ways. :sarcasm:

[Coexist]

86. was that relative elected to represent the entire family by the family?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

107. That doesn't matter

Everyone is still getting punished for something only a select few did.

In the corporate scandals (Enron, World Com, etc.), the corporate officers were elected to head the company. When they were charged with a crime, it isn't as though every employee of Enron or World Com or whoever was also charged with a crime.

[SteelPenguin]

173. bad analogy

If the family member directed your family to build a house and live on a certain plot of land, and it turned out that the land was owned by someone else, what would happen?. You'd all be forcibly removed from the land. Yes you'd be getting punished for the one person's decision, but just because he made the decision doesn't mean that you can still live on that land. It's not yours. you have to go whether you like it or not. Don't be angry at the owner of the land evicting you. Be angry at your family member for choosing to build there in the first place.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

175. We can go back and forth with different analogies, but the bottom line is....

...when you are dealing with something as important to the American process as voting, there must be a high standard of culpability before you can argue one's vote should not count. And collectively assigning culpability on the actions of another doesn't even come close to meeting that burden.

[SteelPenguin]

184. a high standard?

I totally agree that there should be a high standard. how bout we start with state representatives following the rules of the primary election process as presented to them by the national party to make the primary valid? Or do you claim that a 'high standard of culpability' doesn't apply to following the preestablished rules of the system?

You can't just make up your own rules, Pete. They were set. Your state broke the rules. If you really don't get it, then I feel sorry for you.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

193. "Your state"? "Florida"? "They"?

Can you do us a favor and stop using the royal we here?

[SteelPenguin]

194. How about you actually respond to my post

Can you do us a favor and stop ignoring facts that don't favor your argument? Can you respond to anything with a rational argument?

Did the national party lay out set rules for how to hold a valid primary that would count?
Did Florida follow those rules?

You seem to admit that the answers are Yes, and No....yet that shouldn't matter?

[Goblinmonger]

182. That's called false analogy

Criminal law is based on the individual. Unless you conspired with the family member or aided them after the crime, you are not guilty of a crime.

Our representative system is nothing like the criminal code. We live in a democratic republic. You elect officials to make decisions for you. You are bound by those decisions.

Nice try though.

[progressoid]

208. Good example

Let's say my wife and I decide to sell crack and get caught, we will be punished. While our children wouldn't have been law breakers, our actions will have consequences they will have to bear. They won't go to jail with us, but they will be affected. As will other members of our family. And our neighbors. And our friends.

In your analogy, your elected officials are your parents, and you are the children/family/friends who are affected by their mistakes. The exception is that you get to pick your elected officials but you don't get to pick your parents.

[CTLawGuy]

276. funny you bring up the jail metaphor

should a murderer avoid jail because he is the sole provider for a wife and five kids?

If no, why are you punishing the wife and kids for something they didn't do?

If you say yes, please give me your name so I can put you on my jury next time I defend a murderer.

[MissMarple]

318. I agree, except Florida Democrats were out voted by the Florida goppers.

That is the point I'm having a problem with. Essentially, the Florida GOP disenfranchised the Florida Democrats in the legislature and the governor went along with moving the primary date. The Dems tried an end around, but didn't have the votes to pull it off. If the GOP is in the majority in Florida the Democrats are pretty much at their mercy, except the goppers have no mercy and no shame. They are despicable, unprincipled thugs, camp followers and parasites. I don't know how the national Democratic Party could have worked around that....special dispensation?

I don't understand what all went on in Michigan. :shrug:

[Tesha]

24. I hate to break this to you, but somewhere along the line, *YOU* voted...

...for (or abstained from the election that elected) those
state leaders who broke the rules on your behalf.

So don't get all uppity now about how awful it is for
you that the rules are being enforced.

Tesha

[Tommy_Carcetti]

80. Yes, but who are the rules being enforced against?

The state leaders?

Or the voters, who all they did wrong was *gasp* VOTE?

[Tesha]

95. You missed the point of my post.

The state leaders of the Michigan and Florida Democratic
parties are *REPRESENTATIVES* in a representative democracy
(in almost exactly the same way as Congresscritters are our
representatives in our national representative democracy).

Somewhere along the way, those representatives (who run the
state parties) were elected, and our complainees had the
opportunity to vote (or in some other way, influence
that election). So now, when these representatives mad
a series of bone-headed decisions that ended up dis-
enfranchising our complainants, the complainants have
to accept that they elected (or passed on voting regarding)
the boneheads who did the damage.

It isn't Barack Obama's fault nor is it the fault of the
Democratic National Committee. The fault lies squarely
at the feet f the (elected) state committees who thought
they could skate around the rules.

Tesha

[Tommy_Carcetti]

98. When it comes to elections, we don't vote by proxy

We ourselves drive over to the precinct, show the poll workers our voter registration card with our name on it, go into the voting booth ourselves, in private, and make our selection.

I'm not arguing that representative democracy doesn't exist in this country. But it doesn't exist when we exercise our right to vote.

(And let us not forget that representative democracy doesn't exist without direct democracy.)

[Tesha]

164. *IT EXISTS WHEN YOU'RE DISCUSSING YOUR STATE COMMITTEE*.

And, yes, I'm shouting. Because it's starting to
seem like you're being deliberately obtuse.

Your state party is run by your state committee
which is (spmehow) elected by the membes of the
state party.

Really! Read the organizing papers (charter) of your
state party!

Tesha

[asjr]

28. This reminds me of that Abbott

and Costello act of long ago--Who's on First.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

83. Naturally! :) n/t

[TahitiNut]

30. Welcome to the 'clubbed' ...

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/TahitiNut/510

[mrreowwr_kittty]

32. You voted. Your vote was counted.

It is up to the DNC to determine if your state's delegates are seated. Delegates are elected by state party members, in a process determined by the DNC.

No one took your vote away.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

40. My vote was counted, then figurately sent to the DNC and put in a paper shredder

Figuratively, of course, seeing that the paper ballots still haven't gone into effect.

Which is, if I recall correctly, part of what started this whole mess.

[bowens43]

33. Yu need to take this up with your state government.

'Because florida broke the rules' is the correct and appropriate response.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

64. OP point proven. n/t

[iamthebandfanman]

35. if your so upset...

then why arent you telling the elected officials and party leaders in your state how you feel?

blaming obama or his supporters for wanting rules followed is kinda silly.

sorry people in your state screwed you over but dont blame the rest of us!

[AllentownJake]

45. Don't try logic

Maybe if you could write in pictures they'd understand better.

[SteelPenguin]

78. How's This

I didn't vote for that. Our representatives did. The ones that keep voting for that to happen should be removed from office. The people in florida lost their vote, those americans lost their lives.

That's representational democracy.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

91. The state leaders didn't vote to strip our delegates, the DNC did

It's called eliminating the middle man.

The DNC had the power of discretionary punishment, and they chose the wrong punishment. The blame rests ultimately on them.

[iamthebandfanman]

155. whatever helps you sleep at night. n/t

[AllentownJake]

132. Pictures didn't work

Florida is a swamp we have kept getting our hopes up on winning for the past 8 years only to be smashed by their stupidity.

Fuck them.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

242. Let's see....

http://www.clipartheaven.com/clipart/people/cartoons_(a_-_l)/couch_potato_2.gif

[Tommy_Carcetti]

65. OP point proven. n/t

[iamthebandfanman]

157. what, that you cant handle the truth? n/t

[Jamastiene]

37. I got a question for ya...Who's on first?

That's exactly what those conversations are like. They are jerking your chain, being wise guys, talking in circles, bullshitting you. That is all they seem to be doing. They make no sense. I didn't see that particular post, but I have seen a lot of those types of back and forth arguments that go in circles.

It's disheartening.

I'm sorry your vote didn't count. I wish it had, no matter who you voted for, because disenfranchisement is never good.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

50. Naturally!

It also reminds me of this scene from the movie Idiocracy, where the Luke Wilson character is trying to explain to the dim-witted Presidential Cabient that water was a better nourishment for plants than Brawndo (a Gatorade-type energy drink) and that is why the plants aren't growing:

Joe: "For the last time, I'm pretty sure what's killing the crops is this Brawndo stuff."
Secretary of State: "But Brawndo's got what plants crave. It's got electrolytes."
Attorney General: "So wait a minute. What you're saying is that you want us to put water on the crops."
Joe: "Yes."
Attorney General: "Water. Like out the toilet?"
Joe: "Well, I mean, it doesn't have to be out of the toilet, but, yeah, that's the idea."
Secretary of State: "But Brawndo's got what plants crave."
Attorney General: "It's got electrolytes."
Joe: "Okay, look. The plants aren't growing, so I'm pretty sure that the Brawndo's not working. Now, I'm no botanist, but I do know that if you put water on plants, they grow."
Secretary of Energy: "Well, I've never seen no plants grow out of no toilet."
Joe: "Okay, look. You wanna solve this problem. So why don't we just try it, okay, and not worry about what plants crave?"
Attorney General: "Brawndo's got what plants crave."
Secretary of Energy: "Yeah, it's got electrolytes."
Joe: "What are electrolytes? Do you even know?"
Secretary of State: "It's what they use to make Brawndo."
Joe: "Yeah, but why do they use them to make Brawndo?"
Secretary of Defense: "'Cause Brawndo's got electrolytes."

[DefenseLawyer]

43. At that point in the conversation you always get punched in the face.

You are voting in the primary as a member of the Democratic Party, not as a "citizen" exercising your right to vote. The party which you have chosen to be a part of has every right to decide how it chooses its nominee. Of course I think you really know that already, you are just trying to help Hillary. It was a good try. Sorry it didn't work out.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

55. Yeah, okay.

Problem is, I voted for Edwards. I don't care what Hillary wants or doesn't want. People here voted for Hillary, for Obama, for Edwards, for Kucinich...I don't care who voted for whom. I just want all of their votes to count towards something. That's all I want.

All the Dude ever wanted was his vote counted.

And given that this was an election run by our supervisor of elections offices, and certified by our Secretary of State, this was a public election, not some informal Democratic party straw poll.

[uponit7771]

66. Peter, didn't you vote for some of these people? Also, you know you're still paying Nam and S&L

...and other scandals were our elected officials have fucked things up.

The power of the vote in the US is you can lead a movement to elect smarter people

[Tommy_Carcetti]

71. So I have to take in the arse and sacrifice democratic principles....

...to prove what? That politicians will on occasion do foolish things? Like we don't all know that already?

No thank you.

[DefenseLawyer]

87. I can't argue with a well placed Lebowski reference

But sometimes you eat the bar and sometimes, well, he eats you.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

117. This aggression will not stand, man. :) n/t

[DefenseLawyer]

128. Do you see what happens, Larry? n/t

[Texas Hill Country]

47. yes, that is the sort of dumb circular logic employed.... but remember, its Hillary that wants to

disenfranchise the voters by having every vote count!!!

:sarcasm:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

75. Because she would come out ahead.

She agreed to the rules months ago.

In 2004, MI tried to pull the same crap and Terry McAuliffe threatened to do exactly what Dean is doing now! They acquiesced. But now McAuliffe is whining that they should be seated. Absurd.

[Prophet 451]

212. No, Hillary wants to disenfranchise MI voters...

...because she turned down the only fair solution in MI, a re-vote. And she wouldn't have given a shit about MI or FL if she didn't need the votes anyway.

[PatGund]

58. If you're upset......

Then the people you need to address are:

Your state leaders, who took this action in defiance of DNC rules (and then tried to hide claiming the GOP was behind it)

and

The DNC leaders AT THE TIME who made those rules and made the decision to take Florida and Michigan's delegates away.

You'll find those leaders currently running the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Those are the people you need to address your very real complaint to. Not the current DNC, or the campaign of a person that had no part in that decision.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

68. OP point proven.

And this has zero to do with the Hillary Clinton campaign.

[uponit7771]

70. No, but it has a LOT to do with your support of the represenatives who voted in line with rethugs...

...and didn't protest to the DNC or give Dean an alternate plan

[Tommy_Carcetti]

73. But they didn't vote to strip the delegates.

The DNC did that. The DNC could have concieved of some alternate punishment against those state leaders only. Instead the DNC choose the faulty and unjust collective punishment route against all Florida voters, for no rational reason whatsoever.

So do you now know why I am angry at the DNC here?

[PatGund]

192. Except.....

...the people who MADE those rules and enforced them are staffing her campaign staff. So you know where to find them.

And for the record, I dislike ANY state trying to be "first in line"

Does it suck? Yes. And I sympathize - I was unable to make the caucus in Washington state. And the primary here is meaningless. Does that mean I would support a change in policy?

Damn straight skippy. AFTER the election is over. Not during.

I feel sorry for the people in Florida and Michigan. And if I was living in those states, I'd be wanting to run my party leaders out on a rail. They took a gamble with your vote, and the votes of everyone in that state - and lost the gamble. Next election, run them out of office.

But next election. Because like it or not, the rules were set and agreed on before this election, and the states were warned this is what would happen. Does it suck? Yes. But that doesn't mean the rules should be changed in mid-course.

I play games with my six-year old daughter. We agree on the rules before we play. What signal does it send to her if I say "we're changing the rules" midway though? Especially if it looks like by changing the rules, I would benefit?

I sympathize with you. But the ire needs to be addressed to the party leaders in those states, and they need to be held accountable for their actions.

[Buzz Clik]

69. I don't get why you don't get it.

The people you elected to represent you screwed you and everyone else they represent. It is not particularly fair, but you were screwed.

Did you support a revote?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

76. Florida doesn't really need a revote.

Michigan perhaps, since the candidates weren't listed.

But Florida had all the candidates on the ballot. In the age of the 24-7 news cycle, the internet, and countless pre-primary debates, we were all perfectly informed on the candidates' position and made a decision on what we've heard and read.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

119. No candidate got to have their ground game there.

That's how races, especially primaries, are won (or at least have margins narrowed). Thousands of volunteers and staffers descend upon a state to knock on doors, make phone calls to voters, and organize events. Some people need more than just a few debates and MSM spin to pick our candidates.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

122. We're not living in the 1800s anymore

Ground games are exciting and fun, and perhaps they may still have an effect for elections for county dog catcher, but when you are dealing with something as prominent as a presidential election, they aren't that major a factor. The voting populace is more informed now than its ever been.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

124. This is why Obama is winning.

He has thousands of people canvassing. Personal contact is the most effective way to increase voter turnout for a candidate, whether it be for President or dog catcher. It's time consuming and takes a LOT of people to do it right, but it works. Obama understands it, while Clinton and your candidate Edwards didn't.

[Chulanowa]

77. Your vote doesn't count for the same reason a box of ballots known to be rigged doesn't count

Why did you vote, knowing that the delegates of your state wouldn't be counted? Lots and lots of other people decided not to. The results are thus heavily skewed.

On hte bright side, you're not as bad off as the "One person, One Vote, One Candidate" state of Michigan

[The Traveler]

84. Sorry, Peter

Man, that really, really sucks. It has created a big problem. Of course, the Republicans in your state fully intended that when they helped set up this primary in violation of the DNC rules. Crappy politics, but what do you expect?

Bottom line ... the election in Florida is not valid. It was not conducted fairly. Which sucks especially hard for Hillary supporters because even if it had been conducted fairly she probably would have won by a considerable margin. But there is no doubt that the whole process was tainted (again, with the help of our Rethuglican friends).

This is not fair. Period. Not fair to you. Not fair to other voters who, if there had actually been a campaign in Florida might have chosen differently. Not fair to voters from other states, whose primaries and caucuses were conducted appropriately. It is just not fair.

I wish I had a better answer for you. Life, of course, is often unfair ... but in a matter as serious as voting rights in the world's largest representative democracy that unfairness should raise more alarm bells than it apparently does.

The right answer, I believe, was to reschedule the primaries. We all should have chipped in to defray the cost. (By "we" I mean individual voters from all states, the DNC, the Democratic Party structures of all other states ... everybody.) Now wouldn't that have been a powerful example to hurl in the faces of the Rethuglicans? Of course, it is way too late to pull that off now ... I can't help but feel we missed an opportunity.

[Pawel K]

94. There is nothing honest about the argument you are making

I am extremely disappointed in you. I expect better from DUers, if you are smart enough to be here you should be smart enough to see through these dishonest arguments.

[yellowcanine]

97. Strawman/Red herring alert.

[Umbram]

101. No way, this here amazing debate was WORTH its own thread for sure! (nt)

[Umbram]

100. Who is on First? (nt)

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

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

[Tommy_Carcetti]

104. Okay, for the one millionth time.....

I didn't vote for Hillary. I voted for Edwards.

I could prove to you that I voted for Edwards, but our election in Florida involved a secret ballot. Because it was governed by Florida election law and administered by our supervisor of elections and certified by our Secretary of State. In other words, a legitimate, secret ballot election that we are accustomed to in these United States of America.

I don't care who voted for whom. I want all our votes to count for something. All the votes for Hillary, All the votes for Edwards, and absolutely, positively, 100%, all the votes for Obama, too.

[Independent-Voter]

106. Whine to your state representatives. Better yet, you may want to pay attention to what they're doing

You act like this just crept up. Bullshit - anyone that pays any attention to politics knew the deal well before the primaries.


Again - that representative democracy thingy. Check into it sometime. It's only the bedrock of our political foundation.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

110. Representative democracy does not apply to going to the polls to cast a vote

Representative Democracy does not exist without there being direct democracy first. Otherwise, you are just left with an oligarchy.

[Independent-Voter]

140. Again - keep up with what your elected representatives are doing next time

instead of whining on an internet board. You do realize that parties can set their own rules don't you. Hell - they could pull the nomination out of a hat if they wanted to.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

162. You're distracting the issue.

This ultimately has nothing to do what elected representatives did or did not do. This has everything to do with the exercising of the vote in a state and the right of the voters to have their vote given proper effect.

The whole DNC rule dispute is ultimately an internal DNC dispute and should have been settled between DNC and Florida officials. I am no party to that dispute.

[Independent-Voter]

165. You're either a dumbass, or willfully ignorant. Maybe both.

This has been hashed over ad nauseum. You should pay more attention to what your state representatives do, and vote them out accordingly.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

180. Voting them out does absolutely nothing in terms of getting my vote counted

You are the one guilty of trying to sidetrack the issue. The issue is that myself and over a million other Florida Democrats voted in an election duly administered under state and federal election law, and the DNC choose to punish the entire Florida Democratic populace on account of an internal decision made by a few state party officials.

If hypothetically speaking I follow your advice and I get so angry and outraged and vote out my state representative (which is humorous because actually my state representative is term limited this year), if the DNC doesn't seat Florida's delegates at the convention, my vote was still rendered meaningless by the DNC. So what you are proposing is a lose-lose situation regardless.

All the real and manufactured outrage at state officials isn't going to get my vote counted. Outrage targeted at the people who choose to disenfranchise my vote is the only way its going to be. And those people are the DNC.

Now, go back to spinning away in circles like you've been doing for all this time.

[cliffordu]

116. Well...Your vote DOES count.

as a lesson to all the local yokels and state level ding dongs that want to wipe their fat asses with the DNC rules because they think they'll get away with it. You should vote them out at your next possible convenience.

And by the way - Obama has already accepted offers to count the votes in an equitable fashion - it's Herself that keeps putting the Kabosh on anything the DNC comes up with, claiming she's being a victim of the Big Scary Black Man.

The sooner she shuffles of the stage, the sooner we can outlaw pantsuits and count your delegates.

:nopity:

[Tommy_Carcetti]

134. I'm not going to repeat myself, so I'll just refer you to the OP

and ask you whether you see any candidate's name in there at all.

[cliffordu]

169. Right. I went too far with my answer. The state level

DNC officials were warned. They knew FULL WELL that there were going to be consequences ahead of time. The fact that this was a surprise to you is very telling. THEY failed to inform you what THEY were doing had a consequence and you should be angry at them. It isn't a failure on your part, either of perception, or faith. You were deceived by your state level 'officials'.

As a consequence, your vote hasn't been counted. Yet. I'll bet they count before it's over though.

Everyone was believed to be adults coming into this. The people in your state responsible for this should be run out of the party on a rail.

MY stuff about Hillary is just my stuff.

[truebrit71]

112. If you voted in a legitimate primary your vote SHOULD count absolutely. Problem is, you DIDN'T...

..so it doesn't count.

As far as the DNC is concerned there never was a FL primary.

You aren't being "punished" or "Disenfranchised". Your state simply didn't have a legal primary this year. Talk to your state Dem leaders about making sure to have a legal primary next time around and this will be a moot issue.

Until then, sorry your state didn't have a primary for you to vote in this year.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

115. It was a legitimate primary under the law. And the only one we had.

If the DNC felt so strongly against the earlier primary, it could have set up an alternate primary date from the get-go. It didn't. We had one day to go to the polls, and that we did. Because voting is too precious a right to sit at home. I've voted in the 2004 primary long after John Kerry was the presumptive nominee, just because I had that right to vote. So I was not going to sit at home for this one for some brewhaha over a DNC rule over something I had no control over.

But the January 28th primary was conducted under all legal requirements and specificatios as every other election for which I've voted.

What you are advocating is a situation where our Democratic nominee will be choosen by the voters (read: not state leaders, but Democratic voters) of only 48 of the 50 states. And if that's the situation, that's not going to bid well for our Democratic party.

[dailykoff]

118. And you voted, and your vote was duly counted and reported.

Remember Hillary's victory speech? You got your ya ya's so quit crying.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

120. I'm not even going to bother to repeat myself, so just look at some of my other replies re:

Relationship to any specific candidate.

A vote without its proper effect is no vote at all.

[dailykoff]

121. You expressed your preference in a party primary.

Your vote got all the effect it was due.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

123. But as it stands now, the expression of preference was put through the rhetorical paper shredder

And won't see the floor in Denver. So it was given no effect.

[dailykoff]

127. Baloney. Your screwed up election got more ink than the pope.

You really need to work on November if you want your vote to count.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

130. Let's be honest here.

What incentive is there for us to work in November if we were locked out of the process in the first place?

Sure, many of us will vote for the nominee due to the fact it is highly preferable than the Republican nominee, but I doubt you'll see much enthusiasm for the nominee otherwise.

[dailykoff]

133. Let's be honest, Florida is a cesspool. Clean it up.

Don't bitch when you get called on your stupid screw-ups and lies. The problem isn't the DNC, it's your election machinery. Work on that.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

139. So if Florida doesn't go Democratic in November....

....you don't think the DNC shares at least part of the blame here?

Thing about Florida Democrats is, we don't particularly care for screwing with our votes.

[truebrit71]

144. No. I blame the forward-thinking state that has people being accused of 'wizardry'....

...when was the last time that crazy-ass state went Dem anyway?

[dailykoff]

145. It's your state. You live there. You vote for its officials.

The DNC can't fix all your problems, no, and you'd better get moving because November is only five months away.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

149. I expect the DNC to fix the problem. They created it by their reckless overreaction.

The buck stops with them.

They can punish the state leaders for the rule violation. I really don't care one way or another.

They can strip the superdelegates. I don't give a hoot.

They could fine the state party or withhold funds. I won't stay up all night for that.

But sitting by and choosing a nominee without a state's input is foolery to the maximum.

[truebrit71]

154. By your own admission they didn't create the problem..why are they responsible to fix it?

If the election date hadn't been moved this would have been a non-issue.

It got moved.

The election didn't count.

Very, VERY simple.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

160. The problem is not the order of elections. That is an internal DNC dispute.

The problem is the failure to give effect to my vote. Simply put, disenfranchisement.

The DNC choose to strip the delegates. Hence, the DNC is primarily at fault here.

[truebrit71]

166. Again you are putting the cart before the horse. If the FL Dems had left things as agreed...

...we wouldn't be having this discussion. They floated the idea of moving the date and the DNC said they couldn't move it, and if they did there would be serious consequences. The Fl Dems moved it anyway and then act all surprised when the DNC holds true to their previously stated position.

The people that disenfranchised you are the Fla Dems that moved the date of the primary. Any action AFTER that fact is as a result of the initial action ie to ignore the DNC and do what they damn well wanted to do anyway...

FL acted like a bunch of stupid spoiled teenagers that wanted to change the curfew on a Saturday night, even though the parents said there would be consequences if they ignored the initially agreed-upon curfew, and then got all pouty when the parents grounded the stupid spoiled teenagers when they went ahead and ignored the previously agreed-upon curfew anyway.

The DNC did not break the rules, the DNC did not dis-enfranchise anyone, and the DNC should be applauded for sticking to the agreed-upon primary dates.

Any talk of placing the blame anywhere other than at the feet of the FL Dems that approved the date change smacks of willful ignorance of the known facts or outright intellectual dishonesty..

[Tommy_Carcetti]

172. Unless we are talking about a referedum of Florida Democratic voters(not just state party officials)

Your argument is meritless.

"Florida did this" or "They did that"--you are acting as though every registered Democrat in the State of Florida had a say in this internal DNC vs. Florida party officials dispute.

If there be culprits in this matter, the DNC knew or should have known who they were--state party officials. Any retribution beyond such a scope is overbroad and unjustified, and the DNC lies solely to blame for overstepping its judgment.

[truebrit71]

176. The Democratic leadership in FL are supposed to be your representatives...

...therefore they are acting on your behalf.

YOUR representatives made the change KNOWING the possible penalties and yet this is somehow the DNC's fault?

I have pointed out the fallacy in your argument but you continue to lay the blame at the feet of the aggrieved party, the DNC, rather than place blame where it squarely and quite obviously lies, the Fl state party.

If a policeman says to a cornered criminal "Stop or I shoot" but the criminal moves anyway, would you blame the policeman for firing at the criminal? No logical thought process would allow that, and yet you continue to argue that in this allegory for what actually occured in FL the cop really is the bad guy and the criminal did nothing wrong...

[Tommy_Carcetti]

199. Re: The cop analogy

If I am for no fault of my own standing behind the criminal and the cop knows he does not have a clear shot but shoots anyways, and shoots me instead, then the cop is negligent for my injuries.

[truebrit71]

204. Let's deal with the analogy as is. The "criminal" is your duly elected representative..

...and he disobeys the cop and gets shot...according to YOUR logic the cop is at fault right?

:eyes:

[Tommy_Carcetti]

207. If he is negligent and injures me instead, yes.

He is at fault for my injuries.

[SteelPenguin]

222. Four people walk out of a bar

they choose one person to drive the car for them. There is a sign saying to detour because the bridge is out, but the driver you selected purposely ignores the sign and your car plummets off the bridge. Do you blame the driver for your injuries, or the Road Crew?

[truebrit71]

227. But that's not the analogy. There are only parties here. You elected the "criminal" as your rep...

...he is acting on your behalf (it's called democratic representation - look it up) and the cop is the DNC.

The criminal is told "don't move or I shoot" by the cop, the criminal (your representative) ignores the cop, and the cop busts a cap in his ass....and yet in YOUR world the COP is the bad guy...

That is what happened here. And you blame the DNC (the cop)....that's just beyond reason.

[Prophet 451]

214. Frankly, no

My sympathies for living there, dude but Florida's going red even if the Repubs nominate Jack the Ripper.

[truebrit71]

126. No it wasn't otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The DNC made it very clear that it would NOT count if it was moved, it got moved anyway, so it does not now count.

Very, VERY simple.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

129. The DNC should have never done something so stupid and reckless in the first place.

They shot themselves in the foot via their system of collective punishment.

[truebrit71]

137. Good thing that they didn't then isn't it? The FLORIDA Dems allowed it to get moved...

...direct your anger at them...

[Tommy_Carcetti]

141. But the DNC was the ones who moved it!

Seriously, you are really living up to my point here.

[truebrit71]

146. No, the DNC did NOT move it.

It was the state that moved it.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

152. My bad. I meant to say....

The DNC is the ones who struck the delegates. Hence, ultimate responsiblity rests on their shoulders.

[truebrit71]

158. There are no delegates because there was no legitimate primary.

...Ultimate responsibility lies on the shoulders of those that allowed the date to be moved KNOWING that it would invalidate the result of any votes cast by Floridians in the Democratic primary process..

[Tommy_Carcetti]

161. Ultimate responsiblity for disenfranchisement rests on the disenfranchising party

That is the DNC, not the state leaders. You cannot dispute that, no matter how much you want to spin it.

[truebrit71]

167. Ultimate responsibilty for disenfranchisement rests on the party that caused the disenfranchisement.

..and that would be the State party...

The DNC threatened them with not counting the election if the date was changed, and your representatives went ahead and moved it anyway...so the DNC applied their rules and due to those actions removed FL from the process. Whose at fault? The people that caused the penalty to be applied.

Very, VERY simple.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

191. The DNC punished the voters instead of the state party officials.

That's what it boils down to here. That is the very, very simple part.

[truebrit71]

215. No. Wrong. The DNC punished the state party officials with exactly what they told them would happen

It was the actions of the state party officials that caused the disenfranchisement to occur.

No matter which way you try and spin this if the state party official hadn't changed the date there wouldn't be an issue.

Your (increasingly daft) argument states if I stick my finger in an electrical socket that despite all of the warnings about the dire consequences of my activities should I continue it is the ELECTRICAL companies fault when my nads get zapped?

That isn't only childish it's bloody stupid.

If YOUR state party leaders had kept their stupid ideas to themselves NONE of this would matter...THEY are the ones that moved the date, THEY are the ones that knew what would happen if they followed through, THEY are the ones that caused your "disenfranchisement" by ignoring the warnings from the DNC.

Your beef remains with THEM and NOT with the DNC...

[Tommy_Carcetti]

218. You're still arguing collective punishment.

I have never argued that the state leaders or party officials shouldn't be sanctioned here. If they moved the primary contrary to DNC rules, fine. Punish them.

Don't punish us, the ordinary Florida voter.

[truebrit71]

220. The state party officials should have thought about that before they created the problem.

The only people punishing the ordinary Florida voters are the state party leadership that made the move KNOWING that the primary would then not count.

Your anger is misplaced.

Your state's reps effed up.

The state officials tried to bluff the DNC and the DNC didn't blink.

The state officials KNEW that the punishment was that the primary wouldn't count BUT THEY DID IT ANYWAY and you are surprised and pissed off that your vote didn't count?

What kind of stupid ****ed up logic is that?

[progressoid]

232. Apparently not simple enough.

Maybe you'll make more progress arguing with this:

[truebrit71]

234. No kidding!

:hi:

[dailykoff]

113. You need to worry about your vote counting in November.

That is, if you actually care about electing a Dem. The preference primary is a party function and it's over.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

131. Florida Should Absolutely Count. Agreed.

[dailykoff]

136. In November. And at this rate,

it won't.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

151. It Should Count Now, As Is. Course, In November Too.

[mbperrin]

147. Yes, and thank you! Collective punishment is against the

Geneva Convention, and if we were in an occupied country, this would be a war crime.

Thank goodness we're in a "free" country where "leaders" are free to punish groups for the actions of their leaders!

After all, that's how you build winning runs for the Presidency, by alienating and minimizing two of the largest states in the country! Right?

Oh, wait, we might need some of their votes in the GE..........

[shaniqua6392]

150. The DNC and MDP can kiss Michigan and Florida goodbye.

Obama can kiss them goodbye too. I can not tell you how many Michiganders I run into that are so pissed that they are going to stay home. I have also talked to many I would consider Independent voters that are going to vote for McCain. They will be sorry for telling us that we don't count and our votes mean nothing to them. They have disenfranchised everyone who went out and voted in that primary.

[truebrit71]

159. FL maybe (it would have been alongshot anyway) MI not so sure...

...

[AtomicKitten]

163. Take it up with your state legislature.

[graycem]

170. The DNC

will be counting your state's vote, but not without penalty. You may not like the answer, but FL did break the rules. And how many voters didn't vote because they were told it wouldn't count? How is it fair to count an election that wasn't fair to everyone equally? Why have rules at all if anyone can just break them? Where would we be if every state just had their primaries whenever they felt like it despite the warnings they would be punished for doing so? The meeting on the 31st is going to put this issue to rest, and just because you may not get the result that you want, if you're truly interested in being counted, a fair resolution will be acceptable to you. If you are in favor of stacking the deck in Hillary's favor, then nothing will make you happy, and well, you don't get special treatment.

Your logic is nice, but yes, you should be angry with the offender (state leaders) rather than the rule enforcers (DNC). It's not if they decided their actions without fully knowing the consequences. They knew, and they gave the finger to the rules. Too bad, but we all have to follow rules. :)

[Tommy_Carcetti]

174. So far.....

The responses to my question as to why my vote should not be counted towards the Democratic nomination have fallen into these five (5) catagories:

a. "'They' (???) broke the rules."

b. "But why aren't you angry at your state leaders?"

c. "It's (Hillary) Clinton's fault."

d. "Screw Florida, they don't know how to vote anyways and the country would be better off if the state gets washed away next hurricane season."

e. "You know, the Nazis had pieces of flair they made the Jews wear . . . ."

(Okay, so I made the last one up, but I fully expect that one to come up eventually in the conversation.()

[GihrenZabi]

177. Just stop it

Why are people from Florida and Michigan bitching NOW??

Why didn't they do something about this when their primaries were getting moved up? I have not heard anything about the widespread populist movements that took place in those States when their idiot State governments disqualified themselves from the primaries because they were whining about not being first.

This country has no accountability whatsoever. Your State governments fucked up, so take the violin playing and turn it into fist waving and march up the steps to your State House and start protesting. Get rid of the morons who caused this problem in the first place.

If you aren't willing to take that step, quit fucking whining. Solve the problem. Otherwise, I nor anyone else want to hear you bitch and moan about "My vote doesn't count!"

WTF are *we* supposed to do about it?

No, your votes SHOULDN'T count, because the primary wasn't TAKING PLACE in your State when you voted!

If you don't understand why that means your "results" are fucking worthless, then you really need to think about things hard until you accept the truth. Thank God your votes don't count! I don't want a bunch of unrepresentative votes fucking up the primary. It's enough of a mess as it is!

[Tommy_Carcetti]

190. "Get[ting] rid of the morons" does nothing here

Morons or not, they did not vote to strip the state's delegates or boycott the convention.

That was done by the DNC. If there is anyone who deserves to have protesters march upon their steps, it is the DNC. They had the discretion to punish, and they chose the wrong punishment.

If this was in December 2000 and you were arguing the position that voter's votes should not be counted, you would have been rightfully shouted down by this.

[GihrenZabi]

266. The flaw in your logic is...

...that if the State hadn't pushed up its election, the DNC wouldn't have stripped them of the primary votes.

Therefore, the origin of the problem lies with the State, not the DNC - so your argument holds zero water.

Sorry, try again next time. He who creates the problem is responsible for the problem, not he who solves it.

If you rock the boat, don't blame the ocean for making you get wet.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

271. Stripping over a million voters' duly cast votes = solution?

That's pouring gasoline on a small fire, if you ask me.

Now I'm going to ask you once again, how am I--that means me, myself, just me, personally, John Q. Florida, not my state party officials--rocking the boat?

You seriously keep on falling into the same trap of alternating guilt and responsiblity here. Over and over and over again. At the first part of your sentence, "you" means state party officials, and in the last part of the sentence "you" means each and every Florida Democrat.

Honestly....

[GihrenZabi]

275. Give up

How are you responsible?

You and all the other denizens of FL and MI put your State government in office, correct?

Your State government is responsible for moving your primaries up, correct?

The DNC rules were very clear, as were the penalties for moving your primaries up, correct?

Trace the logic back.

Give up. Your State broke the rules and you let it happen. People just didn't give a damn enough to pay attention when the fateful decision was being made, it's too late to cry now.

If you really need to play word games, "you" ARE the State government. It represents YOU - republican democracy, remember? So keep manufacturing semantic arguments to escape the responsibility of electing a State government which fucked you for this primary season.

Either vote everyone out of office at the State level responsible for this mess, or quit whining. You lose this round, so do something about the cause. Don't bitch about the symptom.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

285. Your solution is meaningless

Voting people out of office isn't going to get our votes counted. Had these state officials actually voted to strip our delegates, then yes I would be angry and yes I would demanding to have then thrown out of office. But that wasn't their call--that was the DNC's call. And it was far from the only possible call by the DNC, but the DNC choose to do it anyways.

The DNC is the only party here that has the power to give effect to our votes, or deny such a right. They choose the latter, which is the most extreme and overbroad of all measures.

The right to vote, and the right to have one's vote counted and given proper effect, is the most important right of all in a democracy. Without that, all other rights are meaningless. So you'll excuse me when I ignore your call for me to "give up" or "get over it."

[truebrit71]

178. You missed one. "Your state didn't hold a legitimate primary election so what's your beef"?

..because that's what it boils down to....you may very well have gone through the motions of voting but you knew PRIOR TO PLACING THAT VOTE it wasn't going to count...so why the surprise and why the outrage?

Bring it up with the idiots that created this mess, your state party leadership and see if you guys can get your shit together by the fall...or do you want to move the date of that election too?

:eyes:

[SteelPenguin]

189. They (???)

Dude. Give me a break. You and your fellow citizens elected a group of proxys to make decisions for you. They fucked up and broke the established rules of a contest. This isn't rocket science.

By your logic it'd be ok for Florida to hold it's primary election for 2012 next month, or the election for President in July. There are set rules in these systems to have VALID AND LEGAL elections, and your reps broke em. What's not to get? Why can't you grasp this basic concept that is FUNDAMENTAL to our way of government?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

195. "THEY broke the rules" is getting pretty close to the "THEY want to kill us" argument in the run up....

....to the Iraq War. Remember? Although it was Al Quida who attacked us on September 11th, Iraq is a predominately Muslim country, and Al Quida is a Muslim terrorist group. Therefore, Iraq needs to be punished for something a small group of people did, because they're all cut from the same flock, right?

Collective punishment is wrong. It is wrong. It is not to be condoned. You can talk on and on about how I live in a representative democracy and I should be outraged at my state leaders, but if you willingly advocate that I should be punished by taking away the power of my vote for something that I did not do, you are arguing on the wrong side of reason and rationality.

[SteelPenguin]

206. LOL Give me a Break!

Seriously. You have to be kidding at this point. You can't honestly be comparing the two. I mean heck, you're not even comparing those two accurately. There is no valid comparison. It's just ridiculous.

It in now way compares with "They want to kill us." In the first statement "They broke the rules", the word "They" represents the state of florida, her representatives, and you. There were rules presented to lay out a valid election, your state KNOWINGLY didn't follow these rules, and now it's not getting counted.

It's not collective punishment. It was an INVALID ELECTION. Any rational freethinking American should rally AGAINST INVALID ELECTIONS. It is not arguing against the wrong side of reason and rationality that everyone plays by the same fucking rules.

Get over yourself and grow up. This is the way it works. You can't just do whatever you want, whenever you want. We have rules in this country and you and your state broke em. It sucks. That's what happens though when you break the rules. Anyone arguing that the rules for a contest shouldn't really apply to them is the irrational one.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

210. I will NEVER be told to "get over yourself and grow up" when it comes to MY vote

You are the one trying to assign blame to me for something I did not do. You are the one who is arguing that my vote should not count. That is something that "ny rational freethinking American" should rally against, not elections carried out under federal and state election law and procedure.

You look up collective punishment in any dictionary or encyclopedia, and I guaran-damn-tee you it is exactly what you are advocating to the T.

[SteelPenguin]

216. Invalid Election = You Never Voted

You may have gone somewhere and pushed a button or pulled a lever, but you didn't vote. I could go to a polling place today and push a button or pull a lever, but it wouldn't be a vote.

You, and every citizen in Michigan and Florida, should be able to have their voices heard in a free and fair election. You are the one arguing against this. You are the one arguing that free and fair elections aren't necessary.

This is not collective punishment, or collective responsibilty, or any kind of group punishment or assignment. You gave the responsibility to hold a valid election to a group of people and they fucked it up. You are suffering from their fuckup.

If you want to believe it's collective punishment, and you need that, fine. But it's coming from your State Reps, not the party.

[PVnRT]

224. Well, someone compared the DNC's actions to war crimes, so point 5 has come up

on your side, that is.

[ecstatic]

179. I would be furious too, but what do you suggest should happen at this point?

Everyone should have worked tirelessly to resolve this problem last year. Even I saw that the so called punishment would be a complete disaster. But these rules were agreed upon by the DNC, Clinton, and Obama last year--is it really fair to change the rules now, AFTER everything that has happened?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

185. Here's what I propose.

1. Seat only the elected delegates who are representative of the popular vote cast by Florida Democrats on January 29th. Don't seat Florida's superdelegates.

2. Any state party officials or elected Democrats who were involved in moving the primary date are subject to suspension of their positions on any DNC or congressional committees or leadership positions.

3. Any additional appropriate sanctions against the Florida Democratic Party (but not Florida's Democratic primary voters) may be taken as the DNC sees fit.

[CTLawGuy]

280. 2 and 3 are unrealistic

there is NO other action the DNC can take other than to strip delegates.

2. the DNC has NO say over congressional committees, and state party officials aren't on the DNC so they can't be on any DNC committee.

3. Any punishment against the FL Dem party (if one were possible, maybe denying funds - if they get any DNC funds) punishes the entire party in both this election and the General and would be even MORE overbroad than stripping delegates.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

282. Then just strip the Florida superdelegates. That should be plenty.

Superdelegates have no relation to the popular vote so the will of the voters is not disturbed.

And, I don't know, don't invite the Florida delegation to all the happenin' hoppin' convention parties. Or something like that. I don't care. :shrug:

Just make sure that there is some voice given to Florida's voters at the convention.

At this point, I'm not even that opposed to only seating half of Florida delegates. I don't particularly care for it, but as long as we have some say in the process, it is good enough. (Frankly, "one person one vote" is a fiction in presidential elections anyways. See the Electoral College.)

[CTLawGuy]

294. I think as soon as Hill drops out they will be seated

But if I were you I'd find everyone in your state responsible for this nonsense and kick them out of office. They played this game knowing they could hide behind the voters to try to escape accountability. You need to show them you will not be their human shields.

[bobbert]

186. Does it make you feel a little better that Hillary's campaign counts your votes, but not those

who caucused for any candidate? She likes to enfranchise some voters while disenfranchising others since delegates aren't important anymore.

[baldguy]

188. I'll give you Florida

If we can have a re-vote in Michigan & California.

[theboss]

197. Here is what no one gets: Your vote in a primary is similar to a vote at the Knights of Columbus

You are voting as part of a club. Your chapter broke the club rules. Hence, the national office is coming down on you.

That's all that has happened.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

200. Federal and State law governs Knights of Columbus elections?

And the individuals who get choosen in the Knights of Columbus elections have a direct say in national law and policy?

That's a new one.

[theboss]

203. The Primary winners don't have a direct say on national law or policy.

They've won the nomination and support of the party to run for the office that has a direct say on national law or policy.

We aren't voting for the president. We are voting for the nominee of a political party.

If it wanted to, the DNC could pick names out of a hat and nominate that person - I believe this is what happened in 1988 actually.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

205. You get the point though.

Candidates who become nominees for President have the potential to effect national law and policy should they be elected in November.

Candidates who become the head of a social organization don't.

Hence the national and state interest in elections, whether they be primary or general.

[theboss]

209. Sure, there's a national interest in a primary

There's a national interest in a Teamsters election too.

My voice doesn't matter in a Teamsters election though.

Hell, my voice didn't matter in the Republican Primary.

[Apollo11]

213. Collective punishment of innocent civilians is morally indefensible.

It bugs me big time that some so-called Democrats here on DU believe it is OK to throw more than 2 million (adding Florida and Michigan) of their fellow citizens votes into the garbage can, because of a dispute between party officials about who gets to decide the date of each State's primary or caucuses.

I STILL don't understand why it is OK for Iowa and New Hampshire to ALWAYS go before everyone else.

In a recent post of mine I challenged some advocates of excluding Florida and Michigan, pointing out that it is not morally defensible to throw 2 million votes in the trash and then explain it by saying "they brought this on themselves" (the kind of words you can read here on DU).

I also pointed out that in Germany in the Nazi era 1935-44, people used the exact same logic to "justify" discrimination against Jews. Well, what did they expect - "they brought this on themselves". People then deliberately misunderstood the comparison I was making, and accused me of saying that excluding Florida from the Convention is "just like the Holocaust".

That is not the point I am making. The point I am making is that the collective punishment of innocent civilians is morally indefensible, and all the so-called justifications that people post here on DU are at best spin, and at worst meaningless propaganda.

[truebrit71]

217. Those individuals need to bring that up with their representatives then don't they?

The rest of us will just play by the agreed-upon rules until MI and FL can figure out that they're really not that special afterall and that if they want to play in the game they have to stick to the same rules as everyone else.

They broke the rules.

They got punished.

Get over it.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

219. "They broke the rules."--WHO IS "THEY"?

Can you at least give me your honest definition of the word "they" in your argument?

Just so I'm clear as to where you are coming from.

[truebrit71]

223. Your duly-elected state party representatives are "they"...

...If "they" vote or act in a way that is contrary to your best interest I suggest you vote "them" out and get a new bunch...But blaming the national party apparatus for something that YOUR representatives caused is simply stupid...

[progressoid]

228. You don't know who your own elected officials are?

Or who in your state screwed you?

Hmmm...I guess that's why it's easier to just blame the DNC.

[Apollo11]

249. You know who else broke the rules? -- Rosa Parks.

Sometimes it takes a rule-breaker to challenge an unfair rule, if other channels are blocked or unavailable.

In this case - Iowa and New Hampshire refuse to discuss any change in their "first in the nation" status.

Just sayin' ...

[Stop Cornyn]

221. You say you are being punished. How? Who did you vote for? If Obama, your guy won. If anyone else,

your candidate lost anyway.

How are Florida voters being "punished" any more than South Dakota or Montana voters (because the race is going to be over before their votes are counted, too)?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

226. Delegates from South Dakota and Montana get to be seated at the convention

And get a say in the final nomination vote tally. It doesn't matter if the nomination has been decided for all intents and purposes. They still get a say. A South Dakotan can still go to the poll with the knowledge that there is an effect behind his or her vote.

[truebrit71]

229. Why? BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T BREAK THE FUCKING RULES!!!

HOW FUCKING HARD IS IT TO FIGURE THAT OUT????!!!!

[Apollo11]

250. You know who else broke the rules? -- Rosa Parks.

Sometimes it takes a rule-breaker to challenge an unfair rule, if other channels are blocked or unavailable.

In this case - Iowa and New Hampshire refuse to discuss any change in their "first in the nation" status.

Just sayin' ...

[truebrit71]

264. Sorry but that has to be just about the dumbest comparison EVER...

:eyes:

[Apollo11]

265. So you think Florida should quietly sit at the back of the bus?

While Iowa and New Hampshire get to sit in the front row every single time.

Gotta follow them rules! :eyes:

[truebrit71]

273. Apples and oranges...nice strawman though....

:puke:

[LowerManhattanite]

270. You missed this daft drama-queen's Nazi germany comparison upthread...

...it's an over-the-top scream. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5933969&mesg_id=5937404

[Tommy_Carcetti]

267. WHO IS "THEY"????? YOU KEEP FLIP-FLOPPING ON WHO "THEY" IS!!!!

Apparently, "they" is both the state party officials or the entire populace of registered Democrats in a state, whenever it best suits your argument at whatever time.

Seriously, what honest difference is there between some guy who goes to his assigned precinct in Helena, shows his voter registration card, walks over to the voting booth, looks over the names on the ballot, makes his selection, gets his "I voted" sticker, and goes on his way, and some guy who goes to his assigned precinct in Jacksonville, shows his voter registration, walks over to the voting booth, looks over the names on the ballot, makes his selection, gets his "I voted" sticker, and goes on his way?

Is the fact that the latter of them lives in the state where state and national party officials are involved in a spat over when primaries should be scheduled and the former one does not really cause for one's vote to count towards the nomination and one does not? I mean, seriously? What logic is there in any of that at all?

Wait, wait, I already know your answer. Voters in Florida were not "sufficiently outraged" about a petty intraparty dispute between state and national party as to the scheduling of primaries. That's the new qualification to vote and for your vote to count these days. No longer do you have to be 18 and a US Citizen. Now you have to be 18, a US Citizen, and "sufficiently outraged." :eyes:

And the really sad thing is even if Floridians were "sufficiently outraged" about something as minor as the moving back of a primary for one week, and the primaries would still have been moved, you would still be making this ridiculous, bullshit, half-cooked piece of twisted logic excrement that my vote is meaningless.

If you seriously have no idea why I as a Floridian would be angry at the DNC for coming up with a punishment that is akin to killing a fly with a Bradley Tank and killing my vote in the process, you have seriously have got to be the densest person on earth. Here's a real earthshaker for you--people don't like having their votes fucked with.

And if you aren't just clueless, and you ever again want to talk about the sanctity of the democratic process and the sanctity of every citizen's vote, you will forever be a gross hypocrite of the highest order and your words will mean nothing of any substance whatsoever.

You have done a fine job at proving my original point. Good day, sir.

[Stop Cornyn]

233. 1st, SD and MT voters don't "get a say" because the race will be over by the time they vote. 2nd, FL

delegates will be seated at the convention. Bank on it. Bookmark this thread. It will happen.

FL and MI voters are just being made to wait until the race is over before they officially learn their fate.

Cutting in line will have no consequence for FL and MI beyond the fact that they will be made to wait. That sucks for FL and MI voters. I wish FL and MI hadn't broken the rules, once they broke the rules I wish they had re-voted, once they broke the rules and refused to re-vote, I wish the DNC had not kept FL and MI voters in suspense over their fate, but that wasn't my decision.

By the way, you never said who you voted for.

Do you believe that Kucinich supporters, Edwards supporters, Biden Supporters, Hillary supporters, Richardson supporters, Obama supporters, Dodd supporters, and Gravel supporters have all been equally burdened by the DNC ruling, or do you think that some have been burdened differently than others?

[Prophet 451]

225. OK

Speaking purely of Florida where the election was somewhat fair (unlike Michigan which is just FUBARed):

Firstly, your state lawmakers knew what the penalty would be before they did it and decided to do it anyway. Sucks for you, I agree, but it was your state reps who made the call and they did so in full knowledge that the punishment would fall on you.

Secondly, although you've disregarded the point about representative democracy so far, you've done so by quibbling it and just plain ignoring it. You elected your state reps and, in doing so, agreed that they could do this kind of thing on your behalf. Yep, that's a form of collective punishment but it's a form that you implicitly agree to when casting a vote (and no, it's not banned under the Geneva Conventions). Representative democracy includes collective responsibility. Absurd analogies don't change that.

Thirdly, what other avenues are open to the DNC? That's not rhetorical, I genuinely don't know if they had other ways to punish the Florida reps.

Fourthly, your vote was counted. Your state won't (unless something is worked out) get any delegates seated. Subtle but important difference. Also, as far as I know, there isn't a legal obligation to have primaries in the first place so FL election law is irrelevant.

I agree it sucks and I actually hope some kind of compromise can be reached 'cos the FL situation isn't so far gone as to be irretrievable but stubborness by both state reps and the DNC has caused this and both sides seem determined to stick to their guns. I actually sympathise but at this stage, I doubt the chance of getting anything done prior to the convention.

[stranger_with_candy]

230. Then complain to your state officials

Until they follow the rules, then yeah your vote doesn't count.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

231. Brawndo's got what plants crave!

It's got electrolytes.

4:00 to 5:06:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9i3UCRAJeA

[VotesForWomen]

235. O-nuts don't care about winning the GE; they just hate hillary and want to beat her.

[SoonerPride]

239. Yep, you got that right.

oh, and welcome to ignoreland

[SteelPenguin]

240. I didn't vote for Obama

I didn't vote for Obama, and I don't think the election was a legal valid election. I also think seating the delegates sets a horrific precedent. If the party seats Michigan particularly I will leave the party. (I'll still vote for the nominee in the Fall...but I won't be part of an organization that would seat delegates from an unfair and invalid election.)

[IsItJustMe]

241. Quit your wnining. At the end of the day, when it is all said and done, your vote will count. Have

a little patience for christs sake.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

268. I hope so.

I just can't get over the fact that there are people out there, people who obstensively call themselves Democrats and liberals, who are actually arguing that no delegates should be seated at all and my vote (not their vote, but my vote) should count for nothing. And that when pressed why they hold such a position, the best and only thing they can come up with is "Why aren't you more angry at your state leaders?" That's not an exaggeration; that really is their only argument. And they just say it over and over and over again, without realizing how stupid they sound.

They fail to see the lack of logic in collective punishment, and they are happy with arguing that votes should not be counted because it wasn't their vote that's on the line.

[FlyingTiger]

244. "That murder law/speed limit/tax doesn't apply to ME. My representatives voted for it, not ME!"

You do realize that we live in a republic, yes?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

245. So let me get this straight....

Voting is like speeding or killing somebody?

:wtf:

[Kaleva]

259. We kill by proxy

by voting in candidates who authorize or promote war.

[stevenleser]

247. Irrelevant thread since we know Obama wins even if FL and MI are seated and vote as is and he will

do that.

[Apollo11]

251. Not irrelevant since the whole concept of democracy depends on counting every vote

We are talking here about an issue of principle.

This is not about who will win the nomination.

If it's just about picking a nominee - the DNC chairman, Howard Dean could interview the candidates and pick the nominee on his own.

It would save all the expense and hassle of organizing all these primaries and caucuses.

[eridani]

248. Your vote never counted before. Neither did the votes of most people n/t

[davidpdx]

253. The bottom line is Florida's delegates will get seated

we all know that. It is within the power of the nominee to seat the delegation even though the DNC penalized those states. In the end, an agreement will be made. Will it be exactly what you want? Probably not. I doubt the full delegation would be seated. I'd go as far as saying anyone that advocates that is saying Florida deserves no punishment (versus scaling it back to 50%) and is using this as a wedge issue. This seems to me what is being advocated by Hillary Clinton and her supporters.

You have two choices, continue to use it as a means of complaining the whole primary election was unfair, or you can actually get off your butt and do something about it. How about complaining directly to your Congressional Delegation? Wouldn't this be better then sitting and complaining that the whole primary was unfair?

As with most things I post to Clinton supporters, I doubt you'll even bother to respond.

[Apollo11]

261. What makes you think that PeterU is a Clinton supporter?

Is it because you think Obama supporters don't care if their votes are counted or not? :eyes:

This whole issue is about defending the rights of individual voters to have their votes counted.

It has nothing to do with which candidate each of us thinks should be the nominee.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

269. Thank you.

You said it all.


(And if the poster were smart enough to read some of my prior responses, well....)

[davidpdx]

329. I actually did think from the tone of his post he was a Clinton supporter

Because this is exactly what is being repeated over and over again on the board by Clinton supporters. You are right, it has nothing to do with the candidate per se, but it does go at the heart of what is being used as a divisive issues by one candidate.

My take on this is quite a bit more moderate then others on this board seeing as though I think they SHOULD be seated (in fact I've heard the majority of people say they believe they shouldn't be seated). My point is, not everyone is going to get their way on this issue and moderation IS what is needed. Also I think Clinton should stop using it as one of her issues to stay in the race. The claim that the two states won't be seated is false and a complete lie. Howard Dean said himself he believes the delegates WILL be seated.

It isn't a matter of WHEN it's a matter of HOW they will be seated. Many people are saying it will happen after the last primary (which makes sense). In that case they will be represented at the convention in August, but they won't have a direct bearing on who wins the race. Maybe there is a bit of irony in those two states having little influence on who the nominee is.

[Sancho]

254. PeterU, you are correct. All votes should count...and the DNC should fix it.

Unfortunately, this forum is more interested in a particular candidate than winning the general election. If there is a Democrat in the White House, great! If we loose another election like 2000 and 2004 because of a couple of states like Florida and Michigan, then all the talk will seem pretty stupid in hindsight.

Instead of campaigning here in a large state, the DNC is handing the keys of the kingdom to McCain who has been here running around with the governor.

Go ahead, don't include Florida, but if you lose Florida (with a record primary turnout) to the GOP, then you'll have you own self to blame. Just think, you may even get Jeb before this is over! It can happen (again!).

[gbrenna]

255. Your elected leaders let you down.

Make them pay during the next election-run primary candidates against the Democrats and defeat the Republicans. However, you can not have states breaking primary rules-chaos ensues.

[mythyc]

256. I've just been waiting to unload this one....

[Kaleva]

258. I live in Michigan

and considering the fact that I made no effort whatsoever to try to convince the state leaders not to move up the primary date in clear violation of the rules, I have no one to blame but myself.

[seabeyond]

260. my vote should count. what about those that didnt vote because told votes dont count

fuck them.... but my vote should count

broke the rules

my vote should count

no campaign

my vote should count

unfair

my vote should count

other didnt vote cause wouldnt count

my vote should count



ya right.... and on and on and on

[Tommy_Carcetti]

272. Sitting at home on an election day is always a risk one bears.

People were given no other option but to vote on January 29th. The DNC provided no alternate date for which Floridians to vote where the outcome would allow for delegates to be seated. Had that been the option, I'm sure almost every Democrat would have taken it. But the DNC failed to provide such an option. We had one chance to voice our opinion, and over a million Florida Democrats very wisely took that chance. Those who sat home bear responsiblity for not voting.

In 2000, I did not vote for President. I prefered Al Gore over George W. Bush, but because I in my young logic felt that neither man represented 100% of my personal beliefs, I foolishly sat home. And that is a decision I regret very much in retrospect. But I alone bear the responsiblity for not voting.

[seabeyond]

274. so.... state reps knowingly broke the rules, yawl are yelling about it. voter hear vote does not

count and they should ignore and vote. because they did not vote it justifies not counting their votes

it is the height of hyprcisy to insist your votes count, and fuck the people that didnt take the chance. the hieght of hypocrsiy. on this one, i do not know if i heard any illusional repug as bad as this argument

rules arent followed, and vote should count

rules are followed and hteir vote should not count

makes no sense

[Tommy_Carcetti]

277. Because the rules are being enforce against the wrong people, i.e. the voters

I guarantee you had the DNC choosen simply to strip the superdelegates and strip any state party officials of any DNC or congressional leadership positions, no one here would be upset. We honestly wouldn't care one way or another. Let the DNC enforce the rules against party officials.

But the DNC chose to punish the voters for something that the state party officials supposedly did. And that punishment was stripping our vote, the one chance we had to vote, of any effect.

The fact of the matter is whenever we vote we take a chance. And if we do not vote, as I did not vote in 2000, we also take a chance. And I took the wrong chance in 2000. But at least when you do vote you can hope to say that you were part of the process. And that's all that over a million Floridians--who they themselves (not the state party officials) did nothing wrong other than voting--want to say. That they were part of the process. It's really that simple.

[seabeyond]

278. when being told the vote DOES NOT count.... there is NO taking chance.

this was made clear way before the vote. way before the date was changed. it is not the DNC. it is the people that voted on this measure that ignored the voter.

and now you are willfully chosing to ignore a sect of voters and their right for their vote to count. you are. not someone else. but you. you are doing exactly the same thing as state reps and then blaming dnc again for what you are demanding

the shifting of the responsiblity of blame is amazing.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

279. But they didn't vote. They voluntarily choose to stay home.

No one locked the doors on their houses.

Even if they believed the DNC that the vote wouldn't count, they could have still made their preference known. They could have hoped, like I did, that the DNC would come to their senses and realize how incredibly stupid it was to punish the voters for something that state officials did.

How can I be ignoring the right of their vote to count when they didn't vote? That doesn't even make any logical sense.

All I want is for the voters who did take the time out of their day to go to the polls and vote to have their vote counted.

[seabeyond]

281. because they were told by the officials it didnt count. so it doesnt count

or they get to vote and have it count.

anything else is you ignoring their vote equally as the state officials ignore all the voters of florida.

to penalize someone because they did not "hope" doesnt cut it. a person may have a lack of hope. legally they are allowed.

you ignore it when you refuse to acknowledge that being told their vote would not count kept them from voting. to "pretend" that a person is at fault when they are told it wont count is silly. you use the argument to justify your vote and ignoring their lack of vote. you blame dnc to justify having your vote counted and blame dnc to justify not counting others. it is lying to yourself

and the BIGGEST lie, is blaming obama.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

284. Then it is the DNC's fault for telling Floridian's their vote doesn't count

As it is the DNC's fault for coming up with the punishment that Florida voter's vote shouldn't count.

Bottom line is the DNC screwed up royally, and they bear the primary share of the blame here. And if the situation is not properly addressed and you get a lot of alienated people in Florida who feel left out of the process and as such boycott our nominee in the general, it will only get worse.

As I see it, the candidates aren't to blame for the DNC's overreaction, nor are state officials to blame for the DNC's overreaction against any except the officials themselves. The DNC is to blame here for overreacting and unjust collective punishment against the voters of Florida.

[seabeyond]

287. state official said they would do X. dnc said votes wouldnt count. state officials

did x. before election state official said wouldnt count.

and you blame dnc

wow

[Tommy_Carcetti]

288. The DNC should never have threatened to not seat the delegates in the first place.

It was a totally off-the-wall punishment inexplicably aimed at the voters instead of the state officials.

Had alternate sanctions been threatened and/or enacted by the DNC that didn't affect the validity of over a million properly and legally cast votes, duly administered and certified under state law, we wouldn't be here.

But it was the DNC's call to make, and they were the ones who screwed up. Hence, they are ultimately to blame.

[seabeyond]

291. it was to get states to follow the rules adn control, not allowing self interest

to rule the way

again.....

the rule was there. the repercussion clear.

i am a rule breaker. my kids watch. i am not opposed to them breaking rules. i tell them, be clear on repercussion and if you break the rule, then you own the repercussion. if you are not willing to accept repercussion, .... dont break rule

that is called, clearly putting the responsibility where it belongs.

[seabeyond]

293. but even IF dnc fault. not the voters fault that was told doesnt count, and didnt vote

you cannot reasonably, in any way, argue that your vote should count and the person that believed NOT COUNT votes dont matter.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

296. Again, they choose not to vote at their own risk

What was the worst that would happen? Voting for the candidate of their choice would still be viewed as a tangible show of support. Of course it should count towards something more than just a show of support, but in order for that to happen, first you have to actually vote.

I just don't see the value in sitting home on election day, ever. You vote first, then ask questions later.

[seabeyond]

297. YOU dont get to decide for them. they were given the rules. now hillary and people want those rule

changed. you dont get to decide how a person is suppose to "be". we all individually get to decide ourselves. they had a rule. votes not count. as an individual they get to be hopeless, or lazy or anything else they want to be. the rules were placed to give people the info they needed. now you and hillary want to change the rules on them and BLAME them for "believing" the rules that were given to them

this makes no sense whatsoever.

you dont have to see the value in someone sitting at home. none of your business. doesnt matter. not a part of the equation. a person is told not counting..... then that is what they made their decision from. not from YOUR perspective, wants, need or desire. but the rule decided

the ONLY way we can run a country of a bunch of individuals is by SET rules.

the very essence of what this is all about in the first pplace

you are agreeing that a lone state can break the rules without facing repercussion
now you are demanding breaking rules to deny other their vote.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

298. But no one was ever told not to vote.

And the only one who said the votes wouldn't be counted was the DNC. Which was just about the dumbest decision ever made by a major national political party.

The anger should be directed at the DNC for its foolish punishment of Florida citizens in an overbroad attempt to enforce its rules against a very small group of people.

If people decided to stay home, I'm sorry that such a thing happened, but they choose to do it. The polls were open for them to make a choice (and in Florida, at least, you can't say that all the candidates names weren't on the ballot.) It was up to Florida's registered Democrats to say we do matter and make a stand by voting. And thankfully, over a million did. And they deserve their vote to be counted. But in order for your vote to be counted, you have to first vote. You know what I mean?

[seabeyond]

299. they knew when they did it votes wouldnt count. people were ok with it because they didnt think it

would matter when the time came for their primary. lets be honest. they willfully gave up their right to count their vote because they wanted to have a say in the candidates even if the vote was not legitimate. this is the REASON it was done.

to pretend otherwise is dishonest.

and NO... no one told them not to vote. so what.

it is simple.

voters were told the vote did not count. voters CHOSE not to vote. IF the vote is now going to count, a vote has to be taken over so all will be going in KNOWING the rules. then the CHOICE they make is all theirs.

otherwise, what you bitch about is exactly what you are doing to others.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

302. Nobody willfully gave up the right to vote...

...and the right for that vote to be counted. That's ludicrious. Unless you renounce your US citizenship (or you live in a state where felons can't vote and you commit a felony), you never give up your right to vote. It's a fundamental, inalienable right. People understood there was a primary election being held on January 29th, held under all the federal and state election laws and regulations, and the candidates names would be on there. They voted for the candidate to the choice. Whether to count and give proper effect to those votes was left up to the DNC. The DNC, to this point, has dropped the ball in that department.

Had there been an alternate election date set by the DNC, fine, you would have an argument that the January 29th vote shouldn't count and people should have sat out that vote. The fact remains no such alternate date was ever set. The DNC simply choose to refuse to seat the delegates and leave it like that. On January 29th, Floridians only knew that there was going to be one primary and one primary alone, and most of them were not foolish enough to sit it out on account of some intraparty dispute between state and national party officials.

Nor did the DNC after the January 29th vote ever attempt to organize an alternate primary. If you think an alternate primary should have been scheduled, take it up with the DNC, not me.

I'm sorry, but if you are only given one chance to vote, you have to vote. There is no sitting it out. Otherwise, you don't have any standing to complain if anyone attempts to invalidate, disenfranchise or render meaningless your duly cast vote. (As is the case now.)

[seabeyond]

304. yes, two states did when they chose... chose... to have early primaries. n/t

[Tommy_Carcetti]

307. Your falling into the same trap as the others.....

Talking about "states" as if they are single persons. All your average Florida Democrat ever did was vote on the only day he or she could vote.

[seabeyond]

315. talking about two different states, as in florida and michigan. states. body of land

with boundaries

[Tommy_Carcetti]

317. With millions of individual people within those boundaries.

Very few of them have the actual power to assign the date of the primary election. Nor in this day and age is the actual date of the primary election of principal concern to the average person. We've got too much crap going on in this country to put the highest priority on the issue of whether a state's primary election is to be held on January 29th as opposed to February 6th.

[seabeyond]

300. another angle. knowing votes would not count, to vote was to validate

that vote would not count. there was not the ruckus and changing of agreement and to vote enforced the agreement they would not count.

the only people that still have the right to speak out are those that refused to vote in a sham ergo justifying it. they are the ONES that did not participate in the agreement by voting under the conditions of this primary

[Tommy_Carcetti]

303. It wasn't a referendum on the primary date.

It was a vote which included the names of all the candidates running for the Democratic nomination.

[seabeyond]

306. you KNOW it was not official. no campaigning. that alone should clue you in.

i am done

[Tommy_Carcetti]

308. The direction to my official precinct, the showing of my voter's registration card,

the fact that I voted in secret on official voting machines, and that the final results were tallied and certified by the Secretary of State as per state law, it was most definetly an official vote. Otherwise, I would have been welcome to vote for my candidate of choice as many times as I wanted to, as per American Idol.

[harun]

262. Get over it. It is the primaries. The only peoples votes who "really"

get counted are the delegates. It isn't a popular vote.

I don't know why people continue to equate a primary with democratic rules or anything else. It is just one political party picking who they are going to run. It isn't perfect, it is sloppy and messy and complicated. Nothing is stopping you from writing in on the ballot during the GE any name you wish.

[Bread and Circus]

263. You didn't vote in a legitimate election. It would be good if they held legitimate elections

in Florida and Michigan.

I'm in the same boat as you. I'm from Michigan, my candidate's name wasn't even on the ballot.

When there's no campaigning, the elections are not legitimate. Start from that premise, then we can talk.

[RunningFromCongress]

283. The people you elected broke the rules. Vote someone else into their position for next time

[Tommy_Carcetti]

286. And how will that get my vote counted? n/t

[MilesColtrane]

289. The people you appointed to represent you, screwed you.

Unfortunately, it happens quite often.

If I gave someone twenty bucks and asked them to buy me a hammer at the hardware store, and if instead, they bought themselves a tape ruler with the money, I wouldn't be pissed at the hardware store and try to sue them.

If I wrote a love note and asked a buddy to give it to the girl I was interested in, and if instead, he rewrote it and passed it off as his own and ended up hooking up with her, I wouldn't be pissed off at her.

If I laid a $1000 bet on a horse who came in first, but was later disqualified for doping, I wouldn't be upset with the track officials for reversing the results of the race. I'd be mad at the trainer and owner who cheated.

...you get the idea?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

290. Another analogy that doesn't make any sense.

Now the DNC deciding to collectively punish all of Florida's voters is like an owner of a hardware store? And selling merchandise is somehow akin punishment? I no get. Are the tape rulers supposed to be used as flagelation devices or something?

It was the DNC's call to stupidly strike the delegates and accordingly invalidate a primary carried out under federal and state election laws. The DNC overreacted and punished the wrong people. Therefore, the DNC is to blame.

[MilesColtrane]

292. OK try this one...

You give a friend money to pay your electric bill, (to represent your interests) they use the money to buy crack, they are caught holding by the police, the crack and any remaining money end up in a police evidence room, your electricity is shut off: AND YOU WANT TO BLAME THE COPS FOR THIS.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

295. But we're talking about actual punishment here within the DNC's discretion

If we were to be honest with your analogy, the cops would haul you in too because after all, you live in the same house with the friend and you gave your friend the money, and why of course you should have known better than to do that. So you go to jail by association under the cop's misguided thinking, even though you yourself had no intention to purchase the drugs and all you wanted was your electicity bill paid.

Listen, if rules were broken, fine. There should be punishment. Against those who broke the rules. And only those who broke the rules. Stripping the delegates and ineffectuating the vote, goes far beyond that, however.

[MilesColtrane]

314. Whatever...

"Listen, if rules were broken, fine. There should be punishment. Against those who broke the rules."

Your state party broke the rules. You are a member of your state party.

There's no reason for me to respond to you any further.
Have a nice day.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

316. Just remember, then, collective punishment is never justified.

Never.

Those who did nothing wrong deserve no punishing. And exercising one's right to vote on the one day he or she is assigned to vote is not doing anything wrong.

But if you want to argue the rebuttal, and support disenfranchisement, be my guest.

[casus belli]

301. You are appealing to people who cannot solve your problem

And you are demanding that they sympathize with you.

Good luck on both counts.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

305. True...

...I just get frustrated at the circular logic from people who try to tell me my own vote shouldn't count, and that I should "give up" or "get over it."

It is a very frustrating situation to be in, and I don't particularly care for people telling me that they know better than me and that I should be more angry at Party A than Party B, when I know what I've seen and I know who bears the ultimate responsibility for choosing not to count my vote.

[DemBones DemBones]

311. Obviously, a lot of people here don't get your point, deliberately.

Counting all the votes is still the Democratic and democratic thing to do.

[dcindian]

319. except of course when Hillary wants the Super Delegates to overturn the primary.

Then none of them should count....


Ya we get his point.

[RichardRay]

312. Let me come at it from the other direction, then...

Why should your vote count. Your vote, the vote of the person with the user name 'PeterU' who posts on Democratic Underground - why should your vote count?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

313. Very simple. Because I am over the age of eighteen....

....a U.S. Citizen, never convicted of any felony, registered to vote in the State of Florida and only the State of Florida, and on the day that the polls were opened to Florida voters I went to the precinct to which I am assigned to vote, showed the precinct workers my voters registration card, went to an official voting machine, made my selection (for the purposes of open disclosure I'll fully admit I voted for one Senator John Edwards), cast my final vote and got my sticker. The vote I made was--to the best of my knowledge--recorded in the final tally, which was then officially certified by the Florida Secretary of State Kurt Browning.

I did not engage in any sort of voting fraud. I voted once, and in the precinct where I was assigned to vote by my county's Supervisor of Elections.

In other words, I did the exact same thing that millions of other registered Democrats did, or will do, in 49 other US States and several US Territories. Fundamental due process demands that my vote be counted just like any other vote cast lawfully under applicable federal and state election laws.

That there was a dispute between state party officials and national party officials as to the scheduling dates of the election bears no relevance whatsoever to the fact that I did everything I was supposed to do in going to the polls on the one day which I was assigned to do so (without being given any other choice as to any alternate dates in which to vote), and exercising my vote in the party to which I am a registered voter.

[RichardRay]

320. In other words, you are 100% qualified to vote in state and local

elections, and any attempt to prevent you from doing so or to fail to count your vote would be illegal and you would have mulitple paths to pursue recourse if you couldn't vote.

The only problem is, that none of that has any bearing whatsoever on how parties choose to select their candidates. There is no 'due process' and nothing 'lawful' involved. You don't have to be a citizen to participate in the selection process, the vote does not have to be certified by anybody except the party, nada. You have absolutely no recourse except as granted by the party. The party could choose to use trial by combat and that would be perfectly within the party's right.

Now, you may not like that, and you may choose to call it unfair, or undemocratic, or any number of other things, but that's the way it is currently set up. 'Fair' is a human concept, defined as humans choose it to be, right now, this is what's fair. Change it if you can or care to, but it still won't be retroactive.

Or, you could get all pissy and go be a Republican; that's up to you. If you feel your sense of fairness has been so totally outraged by the Democratic Party that the Republican Party's version of 'fair' is superior, that would be the logical choice...

[Tommy_Carcetti]

322. But for the last minute property tax amendment question....

....the candidates for the nomination would have been the only item on my ballot. So if federal or state law has no purpose in the primary process, why bother with holding elections governed by such law?

I think the inclusion of federal and state law automatically brings in considerations of due process and fairness, whether this be a party primary or not. And under such standards, there is no arguing that such concepts were violated.

But if you actually believe what you are saying, wouldn't you agree it is something of a misnomer for our party to be called the Democratic Party? Shouldn't the Democratic Party follow the democratic process in choosing its nominees?

[Apollo11]

334. Probably the dumbest question I ever read on "Democratic" Underground

"Voting - who needs it?" :eyes:

[ProgressIn2008]

326. It's okay because it's Obama who doesn't give a shit about you. Sorry!

[ShortnFiery]

328. That's right the DNC PLEADED with the democratic leaders of both FL and MI but THEY would not listen

The delegates will be seated 50:50 but YOUR LEADERS have screwed your votes. Many people within your states did NOT vote because as HRC said herself, they won't count for anything.

Your state democratic leaders decided to BREAK the rules because they were "worried" that they would not be instrumental in selecting the Nominee.

BLAME THEM for not counting the popular - however, the delegates from your states will be seated - FAIRLY.

[boppers]

330. I only got as far as "I couldn't control".

Look, this is your local party. You *are* in control.

If you are not in control, it is not your party, but theirs, and on a national level, your local mistakes? Your fault.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

333. BS, BS, BS

You can and will spin as much as you want but in the end all you are arguing for is collective punishment of people who simply voted on the only day they were allowed to do so by state law.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The average Florida Democrat was concerned with things much more important than the date of a primary to raise a huge stink over what was a state party leadership vs. national party leadership spat.

It is the DNC who overreacted to the situation and decided to kill a fly with a Bradley Tank. The collateral damage is of their doing and their doing alone.

[unlawflcombatnt]

331. The real reason is that your state went for Clinton

If your state had broke for Obama, your votes would have already been counted.

But since your state didn't have the sense to vote for the Great One, your votes don't count. And if those Clinton people try to fix it so that your votes count, the Obamanistas are going to roll around on the ground and start crying like babies.:cry:

You don't want that to happen, do you?

[smiley_glad_hands]

338. Your vote got counted, it just doesn't mean anything.

Try voting for non rule breaking repug wannabe dems next time.