Can someone explain the Michigan and Florida "punishment" to me?

[mirrera]

I know so little about how party rules work. My husband thinks this is an incredibley stupid move on the Democratic party's part. I told him that I did not have a full understanding of the issues and I know someone on DU does.

[electron_blue]

1. I would also appreciate some explanation on this.

[Apollo11]

2. You could always try over on General Discussion - Politics

That's where most of the really smart folks hang out! ;-)

[KittyWampus]

6. LOL! Smart isn't the adjective I'd use. Petty and vindictive come to mind

:)

[tekisui]

3. The State Democratic Parties of FL and MI

broke National Party rules scheduling early primaries. They were given warnings and knew that they could be punished--they went ahead with it anyway.

So, they were stripped of their delegates. Their votes won't count, as it stands now.

It could change at the Convention, but my understanding is the delegates will be seated only if they do not change the outcome of the nominee.

This is only for the Primary, their delegates will be returned for the General.

BTW, the repukes have penalized 5 of their states to half-delegates.

[KittyWampus]

4. The state Democratic party in MI & FL moved their primary dates forward changing an already agreed

upon schedule set by the national party.

The national Dem party is sticking to the rules and refusing to seat those state's choic.

Those are also the pre-existing rules.

The state Democrats therefore screwed their own state's voters.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

5. I can recommend an excellent journal which might help with the Florida issue

madfloridian's done an excellent job of covering and explaining what's taken place in Florida.

Link: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian

[patch1234]

7. anybody who stands up to the Iowa and NH mafia ...

has no chance to be president

[northzax]

8. the Party, which decides it's own nominating system

(remember, a political party has no obligation to allow anyone to vote on anything, the only time you are guaranteed a vote is if your state allows you to select delegates to the Electoral College) and the Democratic Party, for better or for worse, decreed that Iowa and New Hampshire would be the first two contests this year. the State Parties of Michigan and Florida decided they would make an end run and move forward in the calendar. So the Party decertified those results from the national stage. At some point, someone has to be first, someone has to draw the line of what states go in what order, else we will end up doing what Michigan wanted, which was to have a primary before Christmas. and then someone will want to go even earlier, and we'll be doing this at Thanksgiving. Where does it end?

[Pacifist Patriot]

11. In someone realizing that a staggered primary system sucks?

[northzax]

14. got a better idea?

in a country of 300,000,000 people, stretching over 3.5 million square miles?

[sunonmars]

18. I have an idea

We have 2 Super Tuesdays, One in Jan and one in February.

January ST would be the 25 states with the lowest delegate counts.

February ST would be the 25 with the largest delegate counts.

Its give the smaller states their says in 1 go. Then the second Super Tuesday is the nailbiter.

[Pacifist Patriot]

20. But, but, but... that would cost so much money and how in the world...

would the candidates be able to cover half of such a large country in that time? :sarcasm:

[northzax]

21. so you want the media to have more influence?

excellent. at least in Iowa and New Hampshire, the average voter can see all the candidates in person at least once. but instead let's have them do campaigning by media talk show! excellent.

oh, and for the record, there are 51 entities with electoral votes, last time I checked.

[Pacifist Patriot]

22. True, because we certainly don't want to forget the 3 electoral votes...

that come in late February when we're down to 1 candidate standing.

Clearly media access would have to change. Who says changing the primary system means everything else remains static? Get creative!

[northzax]

23. clearly

so, how would you change it?

[Pacifist Patriot]

24. There are a couple of intriguing suggestions here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4071399

The problem is that such radical change is needed. It's a systemic problem rather than a single issue. Campaign finance reform, equal access to media regulations, party cooperation, etc. Quite frankly it's even larger than that and the problem is also with a hard-locked two party system. Just because I can recognize the current primary system sucks doesn't mean I'm equipped to solve the problem. I know when my car is in mechanical trouble, but I don't necessarily know how to fix it. Or sometimes what all is wrong. All analogies are weak by definition, but it's the best I can do under the circumstances. I'm just hopeful the situations in MI and FL can highlight how flawed our system is and inspire real change.

[northzax]

25. the major problem is

as I see it, that it is not possible given the prevalence of unregulatable cable and internet media. the Feds can't require things shown on cable to do much of anything, which is why you can say "damn" on Bravo at noon, but you have to wait until 9PM on sister channel NBC) and given the First Amendment, I am not sure you can regulate what a company using private transmission methods (like satellite, cable or broadband) can show.

[Pacifist Patriot]

19. What a shame we don't have mass communications and national media.

Must be a bitch reaching all those people at once. I know living outside of Iowa and NH I never once had a chance to see anyone engage in debate, see their words in an AP story or visit their websites.

[sunonmars]

12. I personally think

If thats the case, fine the state party but dont penalise the voters. Their rights are paramount in this and being shut out of choosing the nominee, is going to piss them off.

Why shout Michigan and Florida voters campaign and vote in the GE when they have been denied their choice at the primary. That might be what they do, tell them to sod off.

This is where Hillary has been so clever, she stuck with the voters. The others didnt. They may just do a screw you vote tonight and vote en masse for her.

Oh and for anyone to think that they wont seat the Flo and Mich delegates, think again, pissing off those 2 states before the GE would be a kamikaze act. Especially Florida.

[Pacifist Patriot]

13. The problem is with the primary system as a whole.

The staggered system disenfranchises voters by default. Look what happened after just two states. Biden was one of the candidates I was considering and even if I lived in SC my options would be narrower.

Frankly, I find the system a condescending joke on the American voter. I've heard all of the financial arguments for why it's done that way and they fail to sway me. It would certainly be more honest if the DNC just closed the doors, picked one of their own, sent up the white smoke and then announced who their nominee was going to be. The process we have is cannibalistic, distracting and resource draining.

[ThomWV]

9. OK Here goes

There are advantages to a state for having the earliest of primarys. There is great attention focused on the first states and the problems the candidates are forced to adddress are the ones that face those states. It also brings inordinate amounts of money to the state's communications industries. Of course this wouldn't make a dent in the economy of a large state but it means a lot to the little ones.

Everyone can not be first.

Florida and Michigan thought they would go ahead and milk that cow themselves. The Party said no. They said fuck you to the party. The Party said fuck you back, only louder.

The party said go ahead and have your primary early, ahead of the schedule we have set out, we simply will not count your delegates. In other words of you back out of the process established by the Democratic Party to elect its candidate you do not get to be part of the process of selecting the candidate of the Democratic Party.

That said, after the candidate has a lock on the Convention you will see the delegates from those states restored - if they managed to vote for the right guy or gal. Otherwise those silly self-serving states can go piss and moan till the cows come home.

[electron_blue]

15. But.... Fla and Mich are not trying to be first - that already happened.

I still don't get the reason for the big penalties. Sounds like there are no strong political reasons behind this. Is that correct?

[madfloridian]

26. Yes, there are strong political reasons.

Only you are assigning motive to the wrong side. The states agreed to the rules, voted for them, then broke them to give a candidate an edge in the primary.

Their words don't matter, they say one thing but they meant another.

The penalties were because the DNC tried to work with them for months, and they went ahead and broke the rules on purpose.

They were thinking of personal power, not whether the people of their state would have a voice.

It was the party power brokers in the states who want to do things their way, and to hell with the voters.

[Pacifist Patriot]

10. Definitely check out the journal LoneStar is recommending.

I live in Florida and just discovered this the other day! In talking to other seemingly politically aware people yesterday I found out that many still don't know they have been disenfranchised. So I wasn't alone in my ignorance.

My understanding is that the state legislature sets the date for the primary, not the political parties. BUT, is done with cooperation from the state parties. So when the Florida legislature suggested the date change the parties could have screamed that it was against their national rules but they acquiesced.

The Democratic party has a rule stating that only IA, NH, SC and NV can have primaries before February. Stupid rule if you ask me, but they didn't. Apparently it is seen as incredibly important to have less than 5% of eligible voters in our country decide who our choices are. I lost one of my choices after NH!

I sent a scathing letter to the DNC. There is still the opportunity for the DNC to change their ruling and agree to seat the FL/MI delegates. But I fear this is a form of voter suppression because many who feel disenfranchised won't bother casting votes. It stinks any way you look at it.

[noamnety]

16. I view it as civil disobedience on the states' part

I don't have a problem with it, on those grounds, even though I am one who is impacted by it. Short term loss, long term shaking up of the system to make it more equitable. The reality is that national party deliberately disenfranchises all states except 4 as it is. If rebellion is the only way to force change (and generally it seems to be), then I support the states which are rebelling.

Now if they go back next time and just give up, instead of pressuring other states to join them in their action, then I will be angry.

[NNN0LHI]

17. Is your husband a Democrat?

Just curious because the Repigs have been trying to gerrymander our primaries for a long time now.

The Repigs can go screw themselves.

Don