With everything else that's wrong with the Democratic field of candidates I am supposed to choose from, add to that my choice and no other Democrat's choice from Florida will apparently be tallied in the over all delegate count used in choosing this year's nominee. It seems that the DNC has more say over my Constitutional right to vote and have my vote count than anything else. Apparently my state can only hold it's primary whenever the DNC says it can. And January 29th isn't good enough for the DNC. Of course that's not fair or right to voter citizens and how can this even be legal? The silence from the Establishment Media and Politic is deafening on this blatant disenfranchisement of the power of voting Florida citizens. So I will just ask one more simple question, "What's up with that?"
There is a Constitutional amendment on this ballot too, so I will go vote. The amendment is about property tax relief. While I agree that property taxes are too high, I will not vote for this amendment as I believe that the short falls will be made up else where and will impact people who do not own property in Florida, like me. The property taxes are for the services that protect and benefit the owned property and it's owners, like Police, Fire, Schools and what have you. It's simple, the people that own the property should carry the weight of of paying for the services that benefit and protect them. Plus, this amendment will be a wind fall for the huge tourist attraction Corporations that already exploit the land and people in Florida. The attractions are also famous for their low wage service jobs and having the state fill the holes in benefits for these people.
I'm voting such as it is but in the meantime, I sure would like to see some action on having my vote be counted in the Primary. At least as much as Florida votes are ever really counted. Which isn't much if history is a guide. The DNC must be over stepping their authority in being able to nullify the Florida vote count and delegates selected. Still the Establishment silence is deafening. The same thing is happening to Michigan voters as well. It won't surprise me to see someone besides Hillary Clinton win in Michigan. Though it appears that she will carry Florida.
It seems like a flimsy reason to invalidate votes and delegates just because they were cast and chosen on a day that doesn't please the DNC. But as of now that's the way it will be.
http://blog.myspace.com/hosshoss777
I am a simple man of eclectic interests and tastes with no particular academic credentials. I still perceive, think, read and write somewhat. Writing music is a hobby of mine
In Washington State we were able to vote for whoever we thought was the best candidate with no regard to party membership. The parties did not like this and the US Supreme Court ruled in their favor.
This year there will be no unaffiliated ballots allowed. We will need to select either a Democratic or Republican ballot, and sign an oath declaring our allegiance to that party while pledging not to participate in the nominating process of the other party.
Both parties will get a list of all voters who voted in their presidential primary. So much for the freedom to choose who you think is the best candidate.
by
Anton Grambihler (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 285 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 11:46:23 PM
Hillary Clinton has won the Michigan Democratic primary. But only because Obama and Edwards were not on the ballot. Will this be contested if in the end Hillary needs and gets the Michigan delegates to secure the nomination?
It seems odd that people only seem to get upset when their votes are stolen or manipulated in secret. Do it right out in the open and there's no problem.
As for the comment above, what worries me is who the parties themselves have sworn loyalty too. I'm afraid this party loyalty only goes one way. People get to be a loyal party member, but the Parties' loyalties certainly do not lie with the Ameican People. Yet this is apparently just fine with Americans.
by
"Hoss" David P. (51 articles, 5 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 338 comments)
on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 5:30:16 AM
I don't blame you for being upset about beling left out of the nomination process. I'm not sure who is to blame. My understanding is the DNC had told Michigan and Florida not to move their primary dates or face elimination of their delegates. The powers that be in both states essential said, "don't tell us what to do" and the DNC told them, "do as we say or else" There must be some authority for the DNC to do this and the States must know whether the DNC had that authority and decided to go ahead and ignore them anyway believing they wouldn't dare eliminate their delegates and the voice of the people. I could be wrong, but these seems like the States attempting to tell the National Organization -- we'll do what we like and then being taken to task for it. The individual voter is the one paying the price now. It seems the voters have every right to be upset with the State and National organization for not resolving this issue. However, only one had the right to do what they did. The other simply tried to assert a right they did not have. That party that is responsible for the outcome you face now is where you need to go to demand accountability. If it is the State organization then I suggest you demand the leaders be removed and replaced by individuals who can work with others rather than individuals who think they can do whatever they want. The lines of communication broke down, but it was the lines of authority that were at risk of being destroyed if no one was held accountable. I think the person or people who overstepped their bounds of authority are responsible for your situation and they are the ones who should be removed from their positions so this does not happen again.
by
Peter Wedlund (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 167 comments)
on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 8:25:57 AM
Sorry, but you fail to persuade me of the rightness of your complaint. I agree with Mr. Wedlund. Your complaint should be with your state party leaders, not with the DNC. The way it was going, if the DNC hadn't stepped in and put a stop to it, we'd have found ourselves voting in primaries the day after the election. It's rediculous. We should have a single primary vote, all states participating, on a single day. And it should be no more than 6 months before any scheduled election. Our elections are way too long and way too costly. You don't need two years to make up your mind. And this business of being "first" smacks of manipulation and psych-ops to me. The hugely different results of all the recent primary and caucuses shows that there is no benefit to any single candidate and simply underscores the ridiculousness of the process. By the time the actual election rolls around, voters will be so sick of the whole dog and pony show they might not show up at the polls at all.
by
bmobley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 30 comments)
on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 1:13:55 PM
I couldn't agree with you more. My question is why should two republican state make the decussion of who our candidate should be. I do think that we need one primary election for the whole country for one day. I'm from Michigan and am pretty angry. This election cost the tax payers of Michigan $10,000,000 and we have no say in who our candidate will be. The money would have been better spent elsewere.
by
beccy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 87 comments)
on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 7:41:41 PM
It's the State's delegates and they should be able to vote and select them whenever they please.
The whole process is so far removed from any kind of Constitutional suggestion, it's not even remotely Democratic or representative republic.
This arbitrary non constitutional duopoly holding such lock tight, virtually exclusive control of our Government is not only wrong, it's exactly what's wrong with our Country.
by
"Hoss" David P. (51 articles, 5 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 338 comments)
on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 7:42:39 PM
The framers never intended that the masses should vote for president. In fact, the framers didn't think we should vote for senate seats. They knew that all politics are really local and the more power centralized in the government, the more corrupt that government would become. The highest office the constitution calls for the people to vote on is his or her congressman and presidential elector (one per congressional district and though not necessarily often assumed to be the same person) who would in turn look at all candidates running without regard to party and cast an independent vote.
Primaries are a whole different beast. The Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, Natural Law, Green and what ever other parties you can think of have an absolute right to name their nominees as they see fit. The party could decide to throw darts at a phone book to pick a nominee and our only recourse is to withdraw membership from that party.The Democratic Party has nearly already decided to nominate Hillary.Only 50 delegates have been chosen so far by actually voting or caucusing, yet, Hillary already has 190 pledged delegates to Obama’s 103, (Edwards has 51 and Kucinich has 1).The more power we allow the two parties to accrue, the more each and both will be able to screw us.
by
David N-V (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 34 comments)
on Thursday, January 17, 2008 at 9:58:07 AM
8 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
