http://gamingtrend.com
April 18, 2014, 06:07:47 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: And you thought Florida was finished trying to ruin elections...  (Read 1999 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
the Nightbreeze
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 465

Done posting.


View Profile
« on: March 09, 2008, 11:07:14 PM »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080309/ap_on_el_pr/primary_scramble

If this were to go through, In my opinion it doesn't matter which candidate this idea produces delegates for.  It will disenfranchise one half of the party or the other.

Can't we just sell Florida to Cuba or Puerto Rico?
Logged

Done posting
CSL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1356


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2008, 03:28:13 AM »

Quote from: the Nightbreeze on March 09, 2008, 11:07:14 PM

It will disenfranchise one half of the party or the other.

What?
Logged
the Nightbreeze
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 465

Done posting.


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2008, 05:32:18 AM »

Perhaps a better way to state it would be to say it has great potential cause disappointments in multiple possibilities. 

If they don't do something for Florida, the Hillary crowd will cry foul.

If they do something in Florida and Hillary becomes the candidate, The Obama crowd will be disappointed.  Perhaps to a point of not participating in the general election, especially reported as a possibility in some demographics of African American voters.

I didn't account for the possibility of the exercise producing Obama as the candidate.  So there's a way I guess it can go in Florida that breaks the least hearts.

Forgive an old fool for looking at Florida and Voters in the same sentence and not feeling optimistic.

Although I'll grant you, CSL, in my urgency to bring this matter to attention, I did overstate the case when speaking of disenfranchisement.  Shame on me for 6 weeks.

Logged

Done posting
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71767


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2008, 06:01:49 AM »

let me preface this by saying I'm pulling for Obama.


Shouldn't the Florida Primary results stand as they were from the early primary?  Neither Clinton or Obama campaigned there, and (unlike Michigan) both were on the ballot.  I've even heard the FL primary had a record turnout this time, so it's not like people didn't vote.  then again, I imagine either way they do it will result in crying foul from the other side.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2008, 07:08:06 AM »

Granted I'm also pulling for Obama

But I think it's ridiculous for all this attention to be given to this issue. To me, they knew the rules and they broke them.

Best to just let the judgement stand. It's like dealing with a spoiled little child. Even if they were a little too strict, it'll be better for everyone in the long run to be consistent with their original judgement than to set a precedent that if you whine and cry enough, you'll eventually get your way.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71767


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2008, 07:17:05 AM »

Quote from: DarkEL on March 10, 2008, 07:08:06 AM

Granted I'm also pulling for Obama

But I think it's ridiculous for all this attention to be given to this issue. To me, they knew the rules and they broke them.

Best to just let the judgement stand. It's like dealing with a spoiled little child. Even if they were a little too strict, it'll be better for everyone in the long run to be consistent with their original judgement than to set a precedent that if you whine and cry enough, you'll eventually get your way.

but then you're punishing the voters, who have no say over when the primaries are held, and chances are most of them didn't even realize the primary was being held before it was supposed to be held.  it's a lose lose situation.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2008, 07:41:31 AM »

Quote from: CeeKay on March 10, 2008, 07:17:05 AM

but then you're punishing the voters, who have no say over when the primaries are held, and chances are most of them didn't even realize the primary was being held before it was supposed to be held.  it's a lose lose situation.

No.. the people responsible for breaking the rules and attempting to put their primaries outside of the agreed upon time frames are the ones who have punished the voters and they're the ones who should be held accountable.

Funny how this wasn't much of an issue before it became such a tight race. Now that it is, I seriously don't believe that there are only two possible motivations behind the majority of people who are complaining.
1. There are some people who believe that one candidate has a better chance of winning the nomination if somehow these states can be allowed back in.
2. There are a large number of people from these states who want all that money funneled into the state due to them suddenly becoming "clinch" states again (advertising dollars from the candidates, money from all the press who would set up shop in each state to poll voters and report live, etc, etc). In the end, these states get the extra attention that they originally were trying to steal by pushing their primaries outside of the rules.

The DNC needs to stick to their guns and hold these states accountable for their actions because no matter what they do someone will be upset.

In the end it's just like War Games - "The only winning move is not to play"
Logged
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2008, 10:21:59 AM »

The Clinton campaign will not allow the Fla/Mich issues die off.  It's just that simple.  It appears that her and her campaign are wiling to tear apart the convention to try for the nomination.  There is no way that she can win without Fla/Mich and some super delegate tomfoolery.  If she wasn't planning on pushing these issues she would have dropped out by now.  I will say again that the DNC could not have messed this process up more than it has so far.  It's only going to get uglier.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2008, 12:00:28 PM by denoginizer » Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3459



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2008, 02:13:27 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on March 10, 2008, 10:21:59 AM

The Clinton campaign will not allow the Fla/Mich issues die off.  It's just that simple.  It appears that her and her campaign are wiling to tear apart the convention to try for the nomination.  There is no way that she can win without Fla/Mich and some super delegate tomfoolery.  If she wasn't planning on pushing these issues she would have dropped out by now.  I will say again that the DNC could not have messed this process up more than it has so far.  It's only going to get uglier.



You could tell Hillary wasn't going to let it drop when she named FL and MI as states she had carried in her "we're not dead yet" speech after Ohio.  Personally, I thought it was pretty tasteless.  If you have to brag that you carried a state when you were the only one on the ballot, that's pretty sad. 

The Dems need to quickly find a solution.  With two very strong candidates running neck-and-neck, they run the risk of polarizing the electorate within their own party by demonizing the other candidate.  That'll sap enthusiasm in the general election.  I think the mail-in ballots are a bad idea and prone to major fraud.  Personally, I think they should pony up the $30m or so for caucuses.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
the Nightbreeze
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 465

Done posting.


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2008, 04:01:47 PM »

I agree that it is a great shame that the people deciding when events occur harmed the very voters they are supposed to serve.

I also agree that there has to be a limit to what maneuvering can be tolerated, and another vote in Florida is past that point.

I was not at all pleased to see my governor, Ed Rendell, out beating the drum for Hillary trying to win himself a cabinet appointment.
I'm a democrat, and even I can recognize that he's done nothing but put the state right int he shithole.  He suggested that the DNC will refuse to pay for it, as will Florida, so private funding should pay for something to be held in Florida.    Sounded very willing to sell the party for his own gains.  Which is about the speed of Governor Rendell.

Private funding?  Only one candidate needs the election to take place.  How is doing that not going to be seen as Hillary buying the Florida election?
Logged

Done posting
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2008, 05:03:50 PM »

In other news Obama won Wyoming this weekend and gained a grand total of................

2 Delegates !!!! 

Yep. He got 7 and she got 5.

Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Ralph-Wiggum
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2592


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2008, 08:28:11 PM »

Quote from: CeeKay on March 10, 2008, 06:01:49 AM

Shouldn't the Florida Primary results stand as they were from the early primary?

No, because in a case like that the front-runner and the person with a higher name recognition (who was Clinton at the time) always will do better. In many states, Obama has done well by campaigning like hell there. Just look at Texas: two weeks before the primary Clinton had a double digit lead there. But Obama's campaign put a lot of energy into Texas and did much better than previously expected.

P.S. I live in Florida and while no candidate was allowed to campaign here, Clinton sure did have a lot of "private" fundraisers in the state before the primary which got plenty of local media attention.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #12 on: March 11, 2008, 05:02:36 PM »

I find the screams of "disenfanchisment" to be pretty hollow as well.  Both Edwards and Obama stayed off the ballots of those states, just like the DNC requested.  To now turn around and reward Clinton for joining those states in breaking DNC rules... that's pretty lame.

Personally, I thought the DNC was wrong to tell those states it wouldnt allow their delegates into the convention.  Personally, I think it would have been better to have punished them in some other way- it's not the state voters who should be punished, it's the state party leadership.
Logged
whiteboyskim
Senior Staff Writer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7849


Hard partier


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2008, 06:05:23 PM »

Quote from: unbreakable on March 11, 2008, 05:02:36 PM

Personally, I thought the DNC was wrong to tell those states it wouldnt allow their delegates into the convention.  Personally, I think it would have been better to have punished them in some other way- it's not the state voters who should be punished, it's the state party leadership.

Well how else would you punish a state whose leaders broke the clearly established rules, then bitch and complain about it when their arrogance bit them in the ass?

Wait, I think I just described every politician who has ever been elected to office...

Personally, I think they should just split the delegate count from both states 50/50 and call it a day, then slug it out in the convention in prime time. Something, I might add, the networks must be salivating over.
Logged

Behold the glory of my new blog!
Filmmaking is vision plus faith plus balls, all 3 of which Hollywood knows little about.
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #14 on: March 18, 2008, 03:48:32 PM »

But effectively, there's no difference between splitting the vote and giving no vote.  Either way, the same proportion of delegates is going to each candidate.


I'm sure there are plenty of ways to punish the people responsible without punishing the voters.  First and foremost, IMO, would be funding primary challenges for the people responsible for making these decisions.  I'm sure there are other ways, but having the DNC withdraw their support for certain incumbents would be a pretty big stick.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.117 seconds with 53 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.029s, 2q)