Posted on 12/01/2007 8:40:09 AM PST by Kimmers
Es party line, commrade!
Could this possibly be cause for a class-action suit against the DNC for depriving voters of their right to have their votes counted? Hmmmmm.
For primary purposes...you have NO constitutional rights written down. Thats one of the more amusing parts about the American election process. Your state might have some rules but the parties across the land can toss anything into the game they want to.
nope. you do not have the right to vote in a primary.
How about that?
Any party can simply select its own candidate and tell you to pound sand.
Of course, they wouldn’t tell you to pound sand, they just present you with the choice to do that to yourself by the candidates that they vet up for consideration.
Look at Rudy, or most of the other GOP candidates. - What do you think that the GOP is telling you?
Vote for me - I can beat hillary
Hmmm, I wonder if we get them disgruntled enough not to go to the polls next year? =)
The real question is which candidates are hurt by this and which ones are helped.
Michigan is based in the midwest with a significant black population. Obviously this hurts Obama.
And Shrillary is obviously the winner.
Oh, well...too bad for them.
The net result of having Michigan's democrats locked out of the democrat primary, will be to have them cross over to the republican primary.
The next shoe to drop will be a set of talking points directing the faithful on which republican they are to select.
Think about it...
Strip Florida, Michigan and a flew "flyovers" and pretty soon you have a groundswell of protest to negate the primaries and caucuses. A deal would be cut at the convention, and illicit Clinton campaign contributions would grease the wheels enough to assure Clinton a place at the top of the ticket.
Not likely she'd accept 2nd fiddle. Obama wouldn't have a chance past inauguration if that happened and he knows it!
The whole thing is an abomination -- the only thing it helps is to "move the herd" -- the idjits who want to "vote like everyone else, vote for a winner."
If I was King :) I would decree a choice of two options: Either hold ALL primaries on the same day, OR, stagger the actual election according to the same schedule used for the primaries. No more "election day" in November. Instead, we'd have each state with its own election day, yay many months after it held its primary. (ALL states would have their election day delayed by the same amount of time.)
Since no one would stand for the second option, we'd end up with the first. Ain't I a clever King? :)
(If primary voters in one state can base their decision on how the herd moved in another state, then why shouldn't voters in the general election have that same option? Oh? Because it'd be stupid? Bingo. If ALL primaries were held on the same day, nationwide, we'd have at least some chance of getting a candidate based on something other than smarm and money, since NO ONE would be able to vote based on how some other state voted.)
OK - let's say you're right - and maybe you are - who would Dem leaders have them vote for - who do they think is our "Dean"? (Kerry was easy, but Dean would have been MUCH easier.)
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.