Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:49 pm
I'm weighing in on 2 points here - the 1st being Doug's last. Thank you. "Stealing an election" is disenfranchising voters, "flipping" votes, stuffed ballot boxes, etc. Using the rules to win is not. The 2nd deals with the MI & FL problem. DNC makes rules that states are supposed to follow. Some do, some don't, and some - being run by the other party - either don't feel bound by DNC rules or actively go "nyah, nyah" in disobeying them. Meanwhile there are people - over 1.7 million of them - who didn't have a say in either the DNC rules or the date chosen for the election, and are faced with either vote in a primary that "doesn't count" or "don't vote". From a state point of view, it's iffy enforcing rules that were not broken by the group being punished (Dem party). From a people point of view, that's plain old disenfranchisement. I don't care who won those states. For the sake of peace, even though it's not exactly fair since we don't know who the "other" supporters would have voted for if their candidate wasn't in the mix, I'd even roll all the "non-Hillary" votes together and give them to Obama - but not counting over 1.7 million people's votes ain't democratic.
BTW - the superdelegates were created after the 1968 convention so that closely run elections could be resolved without going into "smoke-filled rooms" for under-the-table deals to get enough of one or more candidate's delegates to switch.
BTW - the superdelegates were created after the 1968 convention so that closely run elections could be resolved without going into "smoke-filled rooms" for under-the-table deals to get enough of one or more candidate's delegates to switch.