I respectfully disagree Ronnierocket about re-voting. The states were warned ahead of time not to move the primary dates and were warned about the ensuing consequences of violating the rules. Just because the DNC was short-sited in believing Hillary would easily win the nomination (last year when the decision was made) is a poor excuse to re-vote (I'm not saying this is your reason) when she is not leading now. A re-vote will disenfranchise minorities and the youth vote who had their voices cast aside.
I feel bad for the people of Florida & Michigan who want their voices heard. But there must be consequences for violating the rules. The DNC or whomever should levy heavy fines against any states who violate the primary rules. The voters in Florida and Michigan should look to oust the leaders in their states who allowed this to happen (maybe use the approach California did when they threw out the governor in 2003). They have to stick to their guns here to give the message that this will not be tolerated now or in the future.
Make sure you distinguish between political parties and the governments of the states in which they operate. It is state legilsatures that, operating under thir respective state election codes, that set primary dates.
In Florida, its legislature changed to an early primary date as part of a comprehensive election code bill. The parties had no choice. The loss of National Convention delegates is an admonishment that the national parties apply to the state parties as a means of applying political pressure to the states legislatures.
By the way, I don't understand how a re-vote, as you call it, would disenfranchise anyone.
Last edited by olivant; 03/10/0801:41 PM.
"Generosity. That was my first mistake." "Experience must be our only guide; reason may mislead us." "Instagram is Twitter for people who can't read."
