Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Congratulations to the NAACP. It's nice to see at least one respectable African American organization not assuming the travesties of this election cycle are race-based. I just heard him speaking. He stated that and I am paraphrasing, "I was elected as head of the NAACP to protect and fight for individual rights and to address any wrongs being committed against them wherever they may occur. " Hudos to you Mr. Bond. Finally, a voice of reason in the midst of the insanity.
NAACP National Chair says count Florida & Michigan
Former Georgia state Representative and current Chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Julian Bond penned a letter to Howard Dean in which he wrote, "we are deeply concerned that not finding a solution to this dilemma that recognizes the will and intent of Florida and Michigan voters could cast troubling aspirations on the democratic process of selecting candidates in a fully and equally inclusive manner."
Had Michigan and Florida held their primaries this weekend, instead of violating DNC mandates and pushing them ahead of SuperTuesday, both these states would have recieved far more campaign interest than just about any state outside of New Hampshire and Iowa.
Sometimes greed pays off, sometimes it backfires.
What other state "violated the rules"? The SAME rules that Florida and Michigan are getting punished for?
Rule 11.A specifically set the date for the primaries & caucuses for those three states as "no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February" (Iowa), "no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February" (New Hampshire), and "no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February" (South Carolina).
Iowa held their caucuses on January 3rd. That's more than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February. New Hampshire held their primary on January 8th. That's more than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February. And South Carolina held their primary on January 26th. That's more than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February.
Do you think Democrats should have loyalty to the party "just because?"
You CANNOT make someone sit out in a decision making process, and then expect that person to rally behind the decision of everyone else - ESPECIALLY when the democrats had NO PROBLEM taking FLORIDA MONEY while simultaneously denying us a say in the nomination process!
We moved our primary up to avoid EXACTLY what is going on now: A few non-representative and typically non-swing states setting the "momentum" for everyone else.
History shows that people are "loyal" to one party "just because"...
As for expecting that person to rally behind the decision, in Florida and Michigan, people knew their vote wouldnt count, and yet millions of american got up and still went to the voting booth. Doing so, shows that they will rallybehind the decision.
I didnt make up the rules, I only want to see people follow the rules that they agreed to follow.
If they allow these delegates to be counted (as they should, the Dems are always saying "every vote must count... unless you live in FL or MIchigan"), Hillary would win and the radical wing of the DEms (who is behind Obama) would go wild and riot.
There is no way they'd re-do the election in these states. They will keep their votes from being counted so Obama can win.
These votes should not count.
Fact: The Democratic party warned both Florida and Michigan that if they moved their election day, that their votes would not count
Fact: The Democratic parties in both Florida, and Michigan had pleanty of time to move their election day back to what it should have been, to allow their votes to count.
Fact: Individuals in each state made a determination as to if they should show up, knowing that their vote would not count. You just cant go and completely change the results, simply because one side or another does not like the outcome.
The more people hear Obama, the more he is preferred. This has been happening at an alarming rate. Alarming!
I'm not totally sure thats the case. I'm rather convinced that Obama is getting huge support because people are voting against the Clintons. He's not saying different now then he's been saying since day one. The only difference is that the Clintons have started their machine, and this time, people know their game.
These votes should not count.
Fact: The Democratic party warned both Florida and Michigan that if they moved their election day, that their votes would not count
Fact: The Democratic parties in both Florida, and Michigan had pleanty of time to move their election day back to what it should have been, to allow their votes to count.
Fact: Individuals in each state made a determination as to if they should show up, knowing that their vote would not count. You just cant go and completely change the results, simply because one side or another does not like the outcome.
I'll post this again since you seem to have missed it:
What other state "violated the rules"? The SAME rules that Florida and Michigan are getting punished for?
Rule 11.A specifically set the date for the primaries & caucuses for those three states as "no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February" (Iowa), "no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February" (New Hampshire), and "no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February" (South Carolina).
Iowa held their caucuses on January 3rd. That's more than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February. New Hampshire held their primary on January 8th. That's more than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February. And South Carolina held their primary on January 26th. That's more than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February.
I'll post this again since you seem to have missed it:
What other state "violated the rules"? The SAME rules that Florida and Michigan are getting punished for?
Rule 11.A specifically set the date for the primaries & caucuses for those three states as "no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February" (Iowa), "no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February" (New Hampshire), and "no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February" (South Carolina).
Iowa held their caucuses on January 3rd. That's more than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February. New Hampshire held their primary on January 8th. That's more than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February. And South Carolina held their primary on January 26th. That's more than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February.
Thats like showing up for court and telling the judge that the guy next to you was speed, you can to.
Just because Iowa broke the rules, (assuming that they did per your posting) it does not mean that all 49 other states can just do what they want.
What other state "violated the rules"? The SAME rules that Florida and Michigan are getting punished for?
Rule 11.A specifically set the date for the primaries & caucuses for those three states as "no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February" (Iowa), "no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February" (New Hampshire), and "no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February" (South Carolina).
Iowa held their caucuses on January 3rd. That's more than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February. New Hampshire held their primary on January 8th. That's more than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February. And South Carolina held their primary on January 26th. That's more than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February.
-Preserving the first-in-the-nation status of Iowa and New Hampshire but adding other states in the pre-window period.
-Adding 1 or 2 new first-tier caucuses between Iowa and New Hampshire, and 1 or 2 new primaries between New Hampshire and the opening of the window for all other states on February 5, 2008.
-Having the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee determine which states should be added, using the following criteria: racial and ethnic diversity; geographic diversity; and economic diversity including union density.
So according to that, the early primaries/caucuses of IA, NH have ALWAYS been justified because they are traditionally the first states to do so. In the case of SC and NV, the DNC allowed *only* these two states to do their primary/caucuses early in accordance to the commission in adding new states. Now in the case of FL and MI, those states knew all along of the rules and still chose to break them. Why should FL and MI's delegates be seated when they knew beforehand of the rules and regulations and still decided to break them? If anything they should redo their primary/caucus and this time abide by the rules. I think Hillary has no right asking for those delegates to be seated knowing full well of the rules she agreed upon. Now that she's losing she wants to seat them. It's like changing the rules half way into a football game just to favor the losing team, and in this case that losing team is Hillary.
Last edited by eliptik; 02-15-2008 at 02:56 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
