More Candidates to Skip Rogue Dem States

[sabbat hunter]

http://www.mail.com/Article.aspx?articlepath=APNews\Top%20Headlines\Primary_Campaign_Pledge_20070901.xml&cat=topheadlines&subcat=&pageid=1




I say, good for them and all the candidates should pledge to not campaign during the primary season in the rouge states.

This leapfrogging over each other to get earlier and earlier next year for their primary is absolutely ridiculous. At the rate we are going we are going to have primaries/caucuses in December of this year.

Either the Delaware or the California plan MUST be implemented to stop this nonsense. Get back to a far more reasonable schedule, one which will actually help lesser known candidates or those with less money.

Stop the nonsense! If you live in Florida or Michigan, write and call your legistlators demanding they restore the date of the primary to its previous date. that way your voices will be heard and count.

[DS1]

1. It sickens me that Iowa, of all places, is so important

I do understand that the country should have a system where people are represented fairly, but when people have more say in an election just because there's less of them there, that's total fucking bullshit.

[cyclezealot]

4. Call our legislators tell them to stick to their guns.

The process stinks. The primary season will be over before mid Feb. If Mich does not stick to it's guns/ why not just Not send delegates We will have no voice anyway. Why should the same old lilly white states be the only one's to have a voice. The DLC does not respect a diversity of opinons over those non Democratic states, lilly white states; then the DLC can just ignore Michigan all together.

[DS1]

5. what's the opposite of a lilly white state?

[cyclezealot]

6. It sure is not New Hampshire.

[DS1]

7. I didn't ask you what it isn't

[tokenlib]

8. A lily rainbow state...

Lilly :-)

[cali]

10. Really? SC and Nevada are lily white states?

Could have fooled me.

What stinks is that Florida and Michigan agreed to the new DNC schedule, and now they want to change the rules they agreed to, a scant few months before the primary season. What stinks is the idea that everyone has to be first. I don't feel like I don't have a say even though I live in a late primary state.

[cyclezealot]

11. They are right to work states.

Not very Democratic in my book. Besides , SC has a tinkers chance in hell of goint Dem. Why should the fundies who run SC get so much power. Before MI and FL took this initiative, the Pundits were saying the primaries were over by mid February. Reason to act, I'd say.

[cali]

12. Do you always listen to what the pundits say?

And SC has a large black population, and they vote overwhelmingly dem, and the fundies aren't even in the dem party. And MI and FL have screwed themselves. If you think the FL dems are a match for a united group of candidates and the DNC, you're dreaming.

[emulatorloo]

14. 1. what does the "DLC" have to do with it? (nothing) 2. You make a lot of assumptions about IOWA

-- it isn't lily white
-- parts of it are damn liberal, and the liberal activists go to the caucuses

[Bongo Prophet]

16. You meant DNC and not DLC, right?

No need to start a sidethread :hi:

[durrrty libby]

2. There should just be a national primary week, so that

everyone has a say in the primaries.

The current system is not democracy.

[TechBear_Seattle]

13. The federal government is not and never has been a democracy

But that is neither here nor there. The sole purpose of the presidiential primaries is to select DELEGATES to the national convention, not elect the president. They are, start to finish, members and supporters of a political party getting together in a pre-convention meeting.

Why should a private organization such as the Democratic National Party be forced by law to obey a meeting set up by state law rather than their own internal bylaws? Would such government meddling be allowed by, say, AFL-CIO or the Southern Baptist Association?

The Democrats of Florida have a very easy fix to their dilemma, the same one taken by the party in Washington: ignore the presidential primary and chose all delegates by caucus (at their own expense rather than the taxpayers, which makes me very happy.) The state can hold a primary, but they have no power whatsoever to force a private organization to abide by the results. If the Florida party refuses to take similar steps, they are deliberately choosing to be marginalized. Don't blame National for sticking to very clearly worded and very well established rules.

[Bongo Prophet]

17. I agree - we need to change the primary system.

This has been obvious for several cycles, and never addressed.

I just think deciding to change the procedure outside of the party process is like changing rules in mid-game.
The National Committee members should address the primary issues at their annual meetings, maybe.
Primary scheduling, how early or late, regional solutions, drawing lots - this could all be discussed, proposed, voted on.
(A single National would favor big money too much, I think - regions would allow more intense personal campaigns, using less gas)
Weather should be taken into account as well.

Strange how this popped up after all this time.
I suspect shenanigans at play, at least in FLA legislature.
It sure throws a wrench in the system at a time dems are picking up steam.


Hopefully it will not cause such rancor as to weaken Dems in the general.
Our candidates deserve as much support as we can muster.

It will be an interesting convention, that is for sure!

[MaineDem]

18. Actually, this was suppossed to fix it

Adding diversity by including Nevada (West) and South Carolina (South) into the pre-window was suppossed to help. Both states also have ethnic, labor, and other diversity not see in Iowa and NH.

I see more work in the future though.

[Bongo Prophet]

19. Thanks for the info, MaineDem

Didn't work, apparently.
You are right, it will take more work.
I think a very comprehensive study is in order, bandaids won't be enough.

[MaineDem]

26. I guarantee you that wise heads are already considering it

There will be much change for 2010.

[jmp]

24. Just as long as 96% of the population is left out of the process

Democracy is scary. :hide:

[MaineDem]

25. A wise person once said...

it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.

You have demonstrated that you don't understand the situation. Anything else you say just proves it.

Enjoy your rants. Don't let facts get in your way.

[jmp]

28. And who was this supposedly wise person?

Or more to the point ... who do you think said it?

[tokenlib]

3. As a Michigander--it's time for ROGUE PRIDE

Honestly the system needs to be changed. Yes people agreed to the rules for this year--but that did not stop the leapfrogging by so many states. The cat is out of the bag so to say... And I am NOT going to call my representatives on this one..

These pledges to not campaign are premature and an insult to the residents to Michigan and Florida and the other states whose only crime is that they want to be relevant.

Seriously, I thought this was all much fuss about nothing. But these pledges are totally nutty. If Michigan and Florida do have primaries on these earlier dates--I'd like to see these pledges hold up. Personally, I find these pledges to be just threats and bullying to try to get these states to back down. If these early primaries do get to be reality--these pledges will wither.

[LWolf]

9. This isn't nonsense.

I don't know that rescheduling is the solution, but every state trying to schedule earlier has a legitimate point, and until that point is addressed, this problem is going to continue.

How about people like me, whose primaries are scheduled for May 20th? If the nominee is all but decided by February 6th, where the fuck is our voice in the process? Why the fuck should I vote for a Democratic nominee shoved down my throat by the early states?

If the goal is fair and clean elections, the system is as broken as the levees in NO.

No two early states should be deciding anything for the rest of us.

If the idea is to spread primaries out so that all candidates can campaign in all states, then spread them out. Let them happen over several months.

Just do not count the votes or publicize exit polls until the last damned vote has been cast and counted. Many days to campaign and vote, one vote-counting period.

If the party isn't willing to clean up the injustice in the primary process, then let the fur fly, as far as I'm concerned.

[cyclezealot]

15. Michigan & Fla are rogue states' so are their parties.

The Positon of the Michigan State Democratic Party. They claim NH broke it's DNC pledge first? The leadership of the Michigan Democratic Party says N.H. Democrats moved their primary from Jan. 22 to the 19th. A violation, so says the Michigan Democratic party.
&&

The leadership of the Michigan Democratic Party today announced their intention to comply with the new state law establishing a January 15, 2008 Presidential primary, and to select their delegates to the Democratic National Convention on that day
**
Michigan Democrats believe that no state should enjoy a privileged position every four years in selecting our party’s presidential nominee. New Hampshire’s stated intent to move their primary before January 19th, in direct violation of the DNC rules, is an effort to perpetuate their self-appointed privileged position. That makes the delegate selection process in other states, including Michigan, less meaningful, and results in the candidates paying less attention to the issues that are important to Michigan and other states.
&&

http://www.michigandems.com/
$$
you might find it interesting. Not one Republican presidential candidate has declared that they won't campaign in Michigan. At least they will get half the votes, guaranteed Michigan Republicans.

[sabbat hunter]

20. This is why

we need to adopt either the California plan or the Delaware plan. smallest states go first, largest ones last.

With a single day primary the candidate with the most money to spread their name will win.

By spreading out the primary season rationally we all get to choose the candidates.

By this constant leapfrogging we have now, all it does is make the primary season longer and earlier, and the candidate with the most money will have the best chance of surviving.

[cyclezealot]

21. Delaware plan won't change things.

Money has a big advantage whether big or small states. Most small states are red states, everything between Missouri to Oregon. Most of those would be the lead states. No thanks. Best solution. A national primary with free air time to all. Besides its all moot. Under our federal-state divide without a constitutional amendment, such can't be enforced. Not gonna happen.

[sabbat hunter]

22. red state/blue state

doesnt matter much in the primaries.

Also the primary/caucus season can be determined by the DNC at its national convention.

[cyclezealot]

23. No difference between Kansas and Illinois Democrats.

Very little labor influence out in the Plain States? Your plan,they would go first.

[sabbat hunter]

27. they also

dont have very many delegates.

Is it bad that there is little labor influence in Kansas? There are other people that need support and look to the Democratic party.

Why should only the big states decide who is our next candidate?

The democratic party in the small states should get their voices heard. The only way this will happen is to let them go first, make all the candidates go there.

We as a party support labor rights and the labor movement, but we should not be beholden to them nor any other group/business. We should only be beholden to the little guy, the individual who doesnt have anyone fighting for him.

People who are in unions have the union to help them, but in the smaller states where there is little labor union organizations, they need someone to stand up for them.

I live in NYS, but we need to help everyone. Isn't that what being a progressive is all about? helping those who cannot help themselves or have no one helping them?