RE: Fl and MI...Hillary only cares about them because she thinks she can win them...

[truebrit71]

...if they were simply going to add to her opponents already significant lead she wouldn't say a bloody WORD...

Don't try and sell me that bullshit about "every vote should count" bullshit, she's already shown that she will do whatever it takes to try and skew the game in her favour...lawsuits in NV and TX anyone?

Typical

:eyes:

[leftofcool]

1. What about the voters in those states?

They don't count, right?

[Barack_America]

4. Not to her. The turnout in Michigan was horrible.

But she has no problem with allowing that sham primary to speak for all Dems in MI.

[truebrit71]

5. Did they have legitimate primaries? No? Then at the moment, no they don't count...

...

[leftofcool]

29. of course

5 million voters don't count Good thing it wasn't your state, uh?

[purji]

6. this voter in MI

didn't even have my candidate on the ballot.
we were all told this primary wouldn't count.
If we are looking for fair we should have another election.

[leftofcool]

28. I agree!

[WilyWondr]

7. They elected people to represent them

in the state legislature(representative democracy).

Their representatives changed the date of the primary(on the voters behalf) so that it would not count, but it would be first. Apparently that is what their consituants wanted last summer when they did this.

If they did not like that they needed to contact their state reps last year when the change took place...not now after the primary was held.

[suston96]

2. She already won them. But yes: "every vote should count" is bullshit. Democrats knows that.

[billbuckhead]

3. So you just want to disenfrachise them because they support Hillary?

Some new politics Hillary's opponent and his "movement" is using, sounds like the new politics was learned from Putin.

[truebrit71]

8. That's not even remotely close to the point I was making...nice try though...

..my point is that she wouldn't give a toss if they both were stong Obama states...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

21. And Obama's stance is pure? He doesn't care whether they favor her or him?

Comical.

[purji]

9. no

do you want to disenfranchise me because I didn't support Hillary,my candidate wasn't on the ballot.

[ecstatic]

10. I know someone probably answered this, but if FL and MI

vote again, how might that shift the race? Could Hillary end up leading in pledged delegates?

[truebrit71]

11. No. Not from the projections I've seen. She'll probably take FL but MI is up for grabs...

....PLus, now that she's gone negative there's all sorts of shit Obama can drown her with in FL and MI...

[Birthmark]

13. Who cares?

Your fellow Democrats are being disenfranchised for something that they aren't personally responsible for. Even the Republicans only took half those states' delegates.

Where's the outrage? Where are the Democrats who will stand with the FL voters?

[ecstatic]

19. I stood with them before the voting took place. I was outraged that

those states and the DNC did not work things out beforehand. Now I'm outraged that millions more will need to be spent on do-overs. And I truly believe those states need to have their say, but I'm outraged at HRC's conduct regarding this matter. The time for her to speak up was in December/January.

[Birthmark]

23. You're not getting it.

We *already* voted. We voted legally and in record numbers. Those votes should (and better) count.

There's no "do-over" to it. Even a do-over is disenfranchisement for all those who voted. It's simply Stalinesque. Not even the Republicans did this...in the exact same situation!!

In fact, had Dean done what the Republicans did we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's a sad day when the Republican Party finds a more liberal answer to a problem than the Democrats.

[wileedog]

22. What?

"Where's the outrage? Where are the Democrats who will stand with the FL voters?"

Where was it when this decision was made originally? Where was it when all of the candidates, including Hillary, agreed to this solution that Florida and MI would not have a vote that counted? Where was the holy outrage then?

Oh, that's right, the faux vote that was taken wasn't super critical to getting one's candidate even a snowball's chance back then.

"But its about the voters!!!!!"

Right.

[Birthmark]

25. Originally?

I can only speak for myself. I've been ranting about this for months. I'm pleased that it's finally becoming an issue...whatever the reason.

Disenfranchisement is WRONG. You can worry about your candidate all you want. However, there is a much larger, more fundamental, issue here.

[DJ13]

18. might that shift the race?

Well, it wont is the short answer.

Did Ohio and Texas make any real difference in the delegate counts?

[Birthmark]

12. I suspect that you are right, however...

...she happens to be on the right side of the issue. The right to vote and have that vote counted is fundamental to our system. Take away that right, as the DNC has done, and the system breaks down quickly.

[truebrit71]

14. The DNC didn't take it away, the States did that when they moved the primaries...

...thet were warned, they did it anyway, the DNC held to their position.

The STATES disenfranchised their voters...NOT the DNC...

[Birthmark]

17. With all due respect...Bullshit.

The DNC took away my vote. Period.

Now, the State Party chunkheads broke the rules, true. Obviously, some action had to be taken. But that does NOT necessitate disenfranchising the voters. Even the Republicans couldn't bring themselves to do that entirely.

Frankly, I'm appalled at how little Democrats seem to care about their fellow Dems' right to vote.

[truebrit71]

27. Try this out for size, see if it makes sense...

DNC : Here's the primary calendar everyone!
State Party : We want to move our primary
DNC : No, you can't. Everyone agreed. We've already given you the primary calendar.
State Party : So what, we want to move it now.
DNC : No, you can't. Your delegates won't count if you do that.
DNC : Yes we can! We can do what we want!
DNC : If you move the primary your delegates won't count.
State Party : Bullshit! We can do what we want...besides you wouldn't dare do that!
DNC : Really? Try me.
State Party : Ha! We moved the primary date!
DNC : Your delegates don't count
State Party : What? You were SERIOUS about that?
DNC : Yup. PLUS, if you idiots want do-overs you have to pay for it yourselves.
State Party : We're going to sue you!
DNC : For what? Doing what we said we'd do? How about you go pound sand.

The States parties did the disenfranchising...they didn't hold fair primaries so your argument falls flat...

[ElsewheresDaughter]

15. SHE ALREADY DID WIN THEM!

[Hawkowl]

20. She came in last.

She ran unopposed in both states, so it is no more misleading to say she came in last as it is to say she came in first.

[mmonk]

16. That's correct.

[seabeyond]

24. not to mention some good jabs at dean (never worked with him), obama (make him bad guy)

and she can "play" with the voters (like they havent been fucked with enough yet) and be their champion per a hillary supporter.

[seabeyond]

26. i have figured out why the hillary supporters will not give responsiblity where it belongs

on the shoulders of those that changed the primary. she doesnt like dean. she has always wanted dean out of there. these are her people that went after dean and the florida voter, playing with them, in their power play to take a swipe at dean. dean offered to fix, and they refuse.

it is hillary's democrats that fucked up and why the finger has to be at dean and obama.