This will certainly be fun to watch. Especially if Obama wins at the Dem. Nat. Convention without Florida's delegates, but Hillary would have one with them.
Posted on 09/02/2007 4:29:37 AM PDT by AmericanMade1776
Barack Obama and John Edwards yesterday joined three other Democrats planning to skip states that break party rules by holding early primaries. Their pledge leaves Hillary Rodham Clinton alone in planning to compete in Florida and Michigan.
"It's become clear that Gov. [Howard] Dean and the Democratic National Committee have put together a presidential nomination process that's in the best interests of our party and our nation," Obama said.
The two men, along with Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden, have signed a pledge circulated by Democratic leaders of the four states that have party approval to hold early contests - Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
It says they won't compete in other states that vote before Feb. 5, as Florida and Michigan plan to do.
"Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina need to be first because in these states ideas count, not just money," Edwards said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Late last night it was reported that Hillary will also join the others and submit to the DNC rules.
Now these dems who announced early are castigating the states who changed their primaries in order to accomadate the early announcing dems. Man, these people are get stupider by the minute.
I think the national DNC needs to punish Florida and Michigan even more by announcing that they won’t put the eventual party nominee on the ballot in those states.
I have a radical notion. Three primaries per week, every Tuesday, for 18 weeks. In alphabetical order. That’ll mix up the large and small states and the regions, though all the back-and-forth will increase the carbon footprints of the campaigns. And it will suck for voters in West Virginia and Wyoming.
As an alternative, stack the candidates’ home states near the top of the calendar, giving them their best shot at the “favorite son” vote; failing to win the home folks will shake out the weaker candidates early. The other states can draw lots.
The thing is, everyone acts like the “traditional” fist-in-the-nation status of Iowa and New Hampshire goes back to the founders. It wasn’t until Kennedy that a candidate ran in all 50 sates, and it wasn’t until after Carter that most of the delegates were picked in primaries and caucuses.
Before the ‘70s, most of the delegate seats were doled out by elected officials and party bosses in each party in each state. The notion of primaries as an integral part of the democratic process is actually pretty recent. Even today, third- (and fourth-, fifth-, sixth- ...) party candidates are chosen at party conventions without any public balloting.
What changed? In part, racist southern Democrats abusing the system. in the “Solid South” days, it was easier to elect a yellow dog than a Republican. When the law finally got around to guaranteeing, in a serious way, that black citizens be allowed to vote, the Democratic Party in the several states said that it was a private organization, and as such had a right to keep its membership all-white. The Democratic nominee was a near-certain winner in November. So blacks had won the right to vote ... but not when it really mattered.
The courts ruled, and rightly so, that the party primaries were part of the democratic process. Political parties might have a legitimate claim to be private organizations, but when their “private” proceedings determine who will appear on the November ballot, they’re intertwined with the state. At that point, they become an integral part of the electoral process, and denying access to that ballot is tantamount to robbing citizens of their right to vote. It was a transparent sham that the courts could read right through.
So the primary system as we know it today has really been tried seven or eight times; no wonder we’re still hashing out the details. And since most of the players in these negotiations are either candidates or states, each trying to maximize their own short-term tactical advantage rather than ensure a long-term, fair and just system for everyone nationwide, we can hardly be surprised that the result is such a muddle.
This will certainly be fun to watch. Especially if Obama wins at the Dem. Nat. Convention without Florida's delegates, but Hillary would have one with them.
With the power of Clinton, Inc. behind her, she can make the party come to her.
Absolutely. She will now be able to marginalize the Dean Democratic Party, and take over the leadership without a vote.
Apparently the GOP may have to deal with this situation also. Seems some states keep trying to move their primaries ahead of the schedule the RNC wants them to use.
Hillary has now jumped on the band wagon. She’ll follow DNC rules... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1890037/posts
Funny. I read this differently. Just before the primary Dean will change his mind. Since all the other candidates haven't campaigned there Hillary will stand alone to win the states. A virtual shoe-in for her heinousness.
Let the Dems stay away from Florida in the primary. Let the Republicans campaign here and build some momentum going into the general election.
Actually, on second thought, just who do these parties think they are, telling states when they can and cannot hold elections?
I’d say let the states choose, and if the parties snub them, fine. Then it’s time for reform.
I think the States should be divided into 5 regions of 10 states each. On ten consecutive Tuesdays, starting the first one in February, one state in each region holds a primary. The order of the states within each region is randomly chosen each primary season.
I think this would end early campaigning, as you never know quite where the first primaries will be, and force the candidates to appeal to more diverse, national interests, instead of things like corn ethanol subsidies and retiree pensions concerns in traditional "early" states.
I guess this is one way to make sure hellary is the nominee.
The question that comes to my mind is, how easy is it for Dems to jump registration and vote in the Rep. primary? Given the NYC type retirees in SoFL, that could spell an easy Guiliani win from crossovers.
And here’s another question: If the Primaries are run by Party rules, for Party purposes, why are the taxpayers picking up the tab for the elections?
There should be four regional primaries, IMO, after IA and NH have their elections (last two weeks of January). There should be a Southern (Southern states and TX) primary conducted the last Tuesday of February. A Western primary conducted the last Tuesday of March. A Northern primary (Midwest states) conducted the last Tuesday of April. And an Eastern (New England states) primary conducted the last Tuesday of May.
And yet John Edwards has no ideas and way too much money. How ironic.
Actually, I like your idea better. But IA and NH should still go first by tradition. So that means 5 regions with 9 or 10 states in them.
Why? What makes them special? Why not Vermont and Nebraska?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.