What do the democrats think about Florida and Michigan not being allowed a

It was all about egos. Florida and Michigan decided that they should be relevant in the selection and the DNC said no.

Fully knowing what would happen, the two states made the decision to go ahead.

The DNC did not stop either state from doing a re-vote, it was the local officials (who made the problem in the first place).

Some issues, who would pay? Surely you can't take it out of the general state fund to drop 10 mill for a single party to revote.

Another issue was the Democrats that voted for Republicans would not be allowed to vote in the re-vote. Many voted for the Republican because they were already told that their vote for a Democrat would not count, and most candidates were not even on the ballot. Of course Hilary won, she was the name on the ballot.

The state officials are the ones people should be upset with, not the national party. It was the local officials that cost them a voice in the candidate selection process.

Republicans were told that their delegates would count half.

As JD said, they wanted to be "relevant" in the selection process and defied their national party leadership. Ironically, if they had waited, one or the other (or both) states would most likely have had the relevance they sought by voting early against their parties' wishes.

Personally, I think there should be consequences short of the complete disenfranchisement that appears to be happening. Let the state parties fund a new primary and count the delegates as half.

The Democratic Party has been, over the past eight years, consistently harping on how the Republican Party has disenfranchised voters in states the Democrats lost and the Republicans won. It?s become almost comical, at least in my opinion, because the charges have been no more than empty and unsubstantiated political rhetoric.

And now we see where the Democratic Party is REALLY disenfranchising voters in TWO states ? and in their own primary. I?m just shaking my head in disbelief!

What if the Republican Party had done this? It would be front page news and above the fold headlines in every major media outlet in the country! With the Democrats, it?s not much more than a passing tidbit.

Anyone who really believes that the Democratic Party is based in principle must be living on another planet.

By all rights, the Democrats should lose in a landslide. But it?ll still be John McCain by 10 percent ? regardless of which disingenuous Democrat they finally nominate.

Edit:

P.S. The Democratic Party has dug itself into a huge hole - disarray and chaos might be accurate descriptors. Neither candidate has any business being so close to the presidency. The Democratic Party cut its own throat when they threw Joe Lieberman under the bus. By all rights, their comedy of errors shouldn't stand a chance of winning - but wait, it actually does stand a chance of winning. Like I said, I'm shaking my head in disbelief.

Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden ? ANY (well, most) of those who?ve been rejected are better qualified than the two jokers left standing. And Joe Lieberman would be the next president if the Democrats had any brains.

The Republicans are sticking to their guns. Michigan gets only half of its delegates. (Not that it matter.)

We get to vote for the President to nominate him/her, but the actual election?

This whole primary process is much ado about nothing.

I'm not a Republican either, I'm independent.

The national party established the rules for selecting it's nominee. The state parties in Michigan and Florida chose to violate those rules, knowing in advance what the penalty would be. The state parties are responsible for their members' voices being ignored, not the national party.

I think the primary system is poorly run, that Iowa and New Hampshire have too much early influence, and that states with large populations like Florida and Michigan should have more influence. Personally I favor a system that wouldn't start until April and would rotate the order among regional blocks. But this is an issue for the national parties to resolve in committee. It's not for individual state parties to try to dictate by setting their own rules and then pout like children caught cutting in line.

For instance, Hillary was the only Democrat on the ticket. In Michigan, it was invalid to even write in Obama's name. She won both states overwhelmingly because she got her name on the ballot before the dispute got started, and she did not remove it.

Obama's people don't like some of the re-vote ideas. They say that in open primaries a lot of people who would otherwise vote Republican crossed party lines to vote for him, and that can't happen in a Democrat-only Mulligan primary. Hillary's people don't like the caucus solution, because she always gets whipped in caucuses.

Right now you have a big pile of votes for Clinton that aren't fairly hers because her opponents followed party rules and stayed off the ballot. There's no completely fair way to hold a second election.

I think they should hold a second election anyway. It's better than disallowing 9% or so of the party's votes when things are running so close. It makes me wonder how many more national elections Florida is going to screw up.

Where the republicans, who also had their primary rules violated.. Allowed half the votes... The Democratic party put their foot down and lost important time with the voters.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1724374,00.html?xid=newsletter-weekly
[i]
Either way, the DNC's lack of foresight is astonishing, even more so now that Florida and Michigan have rejected the idea of costly and less than reliable primary revotes. [u]After all, the Republican National Committee annulled only half of Florida's G.O.P. delegates — [b]a more measured ruling the DNC could have mirrored.[/b][/u] And while Democratic rivals Obama and Hillary Clinton couldn't set foot in Florida in January, [u]John McCain and his Republican competitors campaigned there and scored valuable face time with Florida independents, with McCain even winning the endorsement of the popular Crist.[/u] Despite all that, Florida Democrats campaigned with cardboard cutouts of Clinton and Obama and then turned out to vote in record numbers for the primary election, which was remarkably blooper-free by Sunshine State standards. All the while they were convinced that in the end the DNC would never shut out their delegates, especially with Clinton and Obama running neck-and-neck into the spring.

Perhaps because Dean and the DNC painted themselves into a corner. They can't easily lift the Florida-Michigan sanctions after all the authoritarian chest-thumping they did last year. Yet if the party heads into Denver without a clear nominee — and needing the votes of Florida and Michigan to decide the issue — their peremptory action will seem even more ridiculous, making the leadership of the so-called people's party look like a clique of arrogant patricians thwarting the popular will.

What's worse, Dean and the DNC now look all but AWOL when it comes to resolving a mess they did so much to create, leaving it to the states to figure it out. Nor have Crist and the Florida legislature been much help after they were the ones who led the state into the primary rebellion in the first place. (In this week's poll, Florida Democrats lay equal blame on Dean and the Florida G.O.P.)[/i]

There is alot of ticked off voters, and yes.. They may be ticked at the republican govenorships that did this, but they are also VERY ticked off at the national democratic party. And independant arn't any happier.

I don't know, thats alot of voters to have pi$$ed off at you. And truthfully, right now is the time for that to be happening... This is too close and those are some huge voting blocks to lose.

I don't care who wins the Democratic nomination. If I was the loser, I would blast both the state leaderships and the national Democratic party for causing me to lose it.
Chuckle, no offense... But this has to be the best part of the article.

[i]Meanwhile, little if anything is being done to appease angry Florida Democrats — whose enthusiastic support the party will need if the Florida sun is going to shine on its candidate in the general election. But either way, Florida isn't likely to be the butt of national jokes when this is all over. The new derisive puns may well fall instead on Dean and the DNC — starting with Dem-witted.[/i]

What makes the Michigan voters any less ticked? Why is all this attention going to Florida?
Dan

It couldn't have happened to a nicer group of people. :)

I've always believed that the only good Democrat was an unelected one. If they keep shooting themselves in the foot, I may get my wish.

However, in the "Be careful what you wish for" department.

On the left we have a Democrat, on the right we have a Republacrat. Some Democrats (at least where I work) have made McCain an honorary member of their party and will vote for him regardless of whom wins the Democratic nomination.

This year we'll have a choice between a blue democrat and a red democrat.