Reason 1: Both Michigan and Florida are key swing states come November. The Democratic nominee will need every last vote they can get in those states. By not seating the delegates, some Democratic voters get pretty pissed off and simply won't vote. And they certainly have a right to get angry at the Democratic party. That brings me to reason two.
Reason 2: Every last voter in this country deserves to get their voice heard, regardless of who they voted for. It's unfair to the voters of Michigan and Florida that the voters of 48 other states will have their voices heard at the convention, but they won't.
Reason 3: The reason the DNC gave for stripping Michigan and Florida of their delegates was that they moved their primary up too early. I usually agree with the DNC, but they were wrong in this situation. Every state should get a change to have an equally strong voice in the nomination process. Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina shouldn't be the only states to get in on the action. Thats why I have said repeatedly that there needs to be a national primary come 2012.
So along with Sen. Clinton and the people of Michigan and Florida, who have voted and will soon vote, I ask the Democratic National Convention to seat their delegates at the convention. Every American who chooses to vote deserves his or her voice be heard when it comes to selecting the next President of the United States.
4 comments :
Do you honestly feel that allowing delegates from states that didn't follow party rules is the right thing to do or is it because Hillary, along with these states, was also willing to flaunt party rules by leaving her name on the ballot in those states while the other candidates removed theirs in keeping with party rules? Is it fair to reward a candidate or state for flaunting party rules?
There is a way to appease the voters in these states and still be fair. Allow the democratic leaders in each district in these states to pick a set number of uncommitted delegates for the convention. You will have appeased all of the democratic voters in the state and also will not have rewarded the candidates who flaunted party rules in hopes of winning and eventually seating these ill-gotten delegates.
Hey Johnny, picking a set of uncommitted delegates for the convention is still flaunting party rules. Since there is going to be a democratic primary tomorrow in Florida the people will have a chance to vote for the candidate of their choice. When the votes are tallied who ever wins the votes wins the delegates. Why have a primary if delegates can not choose. The ruling was really not a good one by the committee.
The only fair way to appease the voters is let the winner, the candidate the people voted for receive the delegates votes. If I were a Florida or Michigan voter and picked the winner I would be pissed if any delegate was uncommitted or voted for someone else. This is America.
I strongly disagree. The voters in Michigan had NO choice other than Hillary or one of the "lesser" candidates. By seating the delegates from Michigan, you would essentially be penalizing the candidates (Obama and Edwards) who followed the party's mandate. You may not agree with rules or laws but allowing the one candidate who ignored the party's decision to prosper because they were the only one willing to break the rules is just wrong. BTW, it speaks volumes of Hillary's electability when she can only draw a little over 50% of the democratic vote in Michigan with Obama and Edwards BOTH off of the ballot. I would agree with leaving Florida and Michigan's delegates at home before allowing delegates earned in an unfair way.
Post a Comment