Whose to Blame For Florida's Democratic Primary Votes Not Counting?
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
February 15, 2008 2:16pm CST
For weeks before and ever since we've been hearing about how the Florida primaries didn't count for a thing for the Democrats so there was no campaigning done there and the votes were basically just a popularity contest with no delegates awarded. Most of us know the reason for this is because Florida moved it's primary up against the wishes of the DNC so the DNC has decided to "punish" Florida by making its primary election null and void. But, whose FAULT is it really? Who decided when the Florida Presidential Primary would be held? Turns out it was the Republican Florida Legislation. Could this be another case of Republican dirty tricks designed to throw the Democrats into disarray? What do you think? I'd love to hear from Florida voters especially!
Annie
5 people like this
9 responses
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
15 Feb 08
I have not looked into this because the whole thing is a mess as usual. But the Republicans had their primary at the same time, so is it null and void too? I guess I will have to look into it now. Shoot. One more stupid Fl. election. Its the damn yankees that have moved down here, that have screwed everything up. We never used to have these problems. The worst thing that used to happen was stufed ballot boxes, you know the normal stuff.lol Now we have hanging chads and void delegates etc.
The only reason I voted was to vote down an ammendment that won by a landslide. We also have idiots for voters. They do not read the ammendments until they get in the booth. That is way too late to decipher the idiotease in which it is written.
The worst part about this Fl vote, was we had such a good turn out. Now they are going to have a run off on the 26. If there are not going to be any delegates awarded, why are we having a run off? Someone has to be wrong.
Shalom~Salaam~Peace
3 people like this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
16 Feb 08
New Hampshire has a law that they will be the first primary in the nation. Iowa is a small state with the first caucus in the nation. Why should these two states decide who we can vote for president. In the past these two states have determined who will remain in the race and who will not. What Florida wanted to do was have a say in who we get to vote for for president. Don't forget Michigan, with a democratic governor and lesislature. They were punished by the DNC for the same thing. In one report I read it was stated that the DNC did not want the democratic candidate finalized too early and have the press focus on the republican race to be the focus. After all we were told that Hillary was the democratic candidate and the primary was just the final touch.
Why not say it is a Clinton Dirty Trick, they have a history of such things. It is interesting that Hillary was the only democratic on the ballot in both states. A great way to pick up a large block and appear to be the champion of the little guy with a convention fight. In the long run with Hillary having the nomination won when she won reelection to the Senate and Obama making a run just to make it interesting.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
16 Feb 08
Hillary was the only Democrat on the ballot in Michigan but not in Florida. I hadn't heard the report about the DNC not wanting the press to focus on the GOP race but that sounds a bit like something Rush or Hannity would say and I don't think either of them have an inside track to the DNC. I'd say the state of Florida has more of a history for dirty election tricks than the Clintons have ever had.
Annie
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
20 Feb 08
Hillary was the only one on the Michigan ballot because the other democrats removed their names as part of the boycott. She chose to keep her name on the ballot so she could later claim that we should include Michigan after she won the state. That's precisely what she's doing now.
Anniepa, what dirty election tricks does Florida have? I know a lot of dems will never get over the 2000 election, but I've never heard of any dirty tricks pulled by Florida. It was a close race that resulted in multiple recounts. There was a confusing ballot in Palm Beach which was a ballot created by democrats and approved by both parties. There really isn't much more to it than that. Jeb Bush even excused himself from the whole recount issue so as not to give the appearance of impropriety.
1 person likes this
@catjane (1036)
• United States
16 Feb 08
I am in Florida but Canadian so didn't vote but I have followed the elections very closely and I think you could be right about the republicans throwing a wrench in to the whole thing which is fine with me, the less delegates Hillary has the better LOL. The votes still count, they just don't get the delegates awwwwwwww...booohooooo.
@morgandrake (2136)
• United States
15 Feb 08
What? We can't just blame it on the fact that it is Florida? Just kidding.
Problem is that everyone wants to have their states be important politically. It is a clout thing. If you can convince the politicans that your state is important, then they will give your state more money and address the concerns of your voters. It does not matter what side of the aisle you on, you want to matter.
So a lot of states have started to move their primaries earlier. Someday, we will see the primaries occur three years before the actual Presidental election, just watch and see. Of course, that is waht the DNC is trying to prevent.
I don't think it is a ploy by the Republicans to undermine the Democrats. I think it is a ploy by Florida politicians to try to become big and important--and it failed miserably.
@hd1027 (257)
• United States
16 Feb 08
Same with Michigan right, to bad though, if you think about it, there are almost 300 delegates at stake for those 2 states alone, which amount to 10% of all democratic delegates (without offcourse the Super-delegates) especially now Senator Barack Obama got this movement going and young people 18-30 are sometimes quadrupled in their voting, which is really amazing!!!!!!!!!!!
2 people like this
@petebaja (516)
• Mexico
15 Feb 08
I know that the Republican party has pulled off some dirty tricks in the past, but, this claim is over-reaching. I'm not one who discounts conspiracy theorists, but, this one I'll blame on the Democrats.
The Republicans might have written the legislation for the date, but, it was the DNC that nullified the votes.
@suspenseful (40192)
• Canada
20 Feb 08
Are the Florida Democrats are worried? All I have heard on the news is Hillary and Obama, Hillary and Obama, and McClain although running under a Republican flag, is a Republican in name only but a Democrat at heart. Remember last election, you all were hollering and demanding vote counts. So stop worrying about it. With the congress singularly Democrat, it will be a miracle if the Republicans run. So stop putting the blame on whomever.
1 person likes this
@soccermom (3198)
• United States
17 Feb 08
I'm not sure it's a case od dirty Republican tricks, but what really gets me steamed up is all the talk I hear that the Democrats don't really care about those states, and that's why they're not being counted. Once again it's a case of misinformation and not doing the research. Florida legislature should be ashamed of themselves. and at the risk of sounding like I'm committing to a conspiracy theory, dare I say that Florida seems to have some serious problems when it comes to elections.
I could imagine how frustrating it would be to Michigan and Florida voters to feel as if they don't count. But this is not the DNC's fault, but yet it sounds as though that's where most people place the blame. Our election system has gotten too hard for the average voter to understand. I don't think at this stage these two states should be counted. It's biased that only Hillary was on the ballot, to late to organize a primary, and seemingly biased toward Obama to hold caucuses. (Even though I do support him, fair is fair.)
This superdelegate thing also has me frustrated. I saw a superdelegate on Anderson Cooper last week from Wisconsin. He is 21 and has never even voted in a presidential election before. I'm not trying to be discriminatory because he did seem to be an intelligent kid, but the key word here is kid. Can he really understand things enough to take the responsibility seriously? Who knows? But I do know that he gave the impression that he was excited to be on TV and show off his collections of photos and tell stories of the important people who've called him, more than he was concerend about talking of the important role he could play in this election.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
20 Feb 08
Two questions:
1. Why isn't it the DNC's fault? They decided to boycott Florida and Michigan. Obama and Clinton decided to sign on with the boycott.
2. Do you agree with the boycott of Florida and Michigan? I agree there's no reason to count the votes now since the process has already been ruined by the Democrats, but what is your opinion on the boycott itself? As a voter I had no say in the primary dates and it's wrong that people such as myself could be disenfranchised with no recourse.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
20 Feb 08
"The Florida Democratic Party announced Sunday that it would move ahead with its plan to hold its presidential primary on Jan. 29 despite the national party’s decision to block the state delegation from the 2008 Democratic convention."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/us/politics/24florida.html?ex=1348286400&en=9733bce957c2b092&ei=5088&partner=msnbcpolitics&emc=rss
That's for your conspiracy theory Annie. The final decision was made by the Florida Democratic Party, not the republicans. Regardless of all that, the boycott and disenfranchisement of voters was a decision made by the DNC and supported by Clinton, Obama, and a couple other candidates that didn't really have a chance of winning anyway.
I'm sure some would claim it's the fault of Florida and Michigan, but the real fault lies with the DNC and candidates who went along with it. The DNC decided that some states matter more than others and dictated who could have their primary when. Why can't everyone have their primary at the same time? Why are some states forced to have their primary after the votes are counted and the candidates announced? That's why Florida moved up it's primaries. Normally Floridians don't get to vote until March, by which time their votes don't matter anyway. It seems that the DNC just hates Florida and will do everything in their power to make our votes meaningless. It's no wonder Republicans keep winning in this state.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
20 Feb 08
I certainly can't and won't speak for the DNC but I sure hope they don't "hate" Florida and I know I sure wouldn't want your votes to be meaningless but unfortunately in 2000 many votes were just that, particularly those thousands of Jewish voters whose votes were registered for Pat Buchanan. Sorry, I know that's ancient history and I'm not here to revisit that election! Anyway, I'm not saying I subscribe to any "conspiracy theory" at all; I just posted this discussion to get some opinions on it and that's just what's happening and I'm glad about that. Here are the "facts" as I understand them about this whole mess - the Florida legislation, which has a Republican majority voted to move the statewide elections up to Jan. 29. The state Democratic committee decided to go along with that decision, I would assume for one reason because if they had chosen to hold their own Presidential primary at a later date it would negatively affect turn-out. That last part is only my opinion, by the way. You're correct about this decision being supported by the Democratic candidates.
I didn't start this discussion to defend Hillary or to argue her point that the votes and delegates she received in this primary should be counted despite the fact that it was agreed upon in advance that they would not count. I don't know how this will all play out ultimately and I'm not sure what my choice would be if I had the power to decide, which obviously I do NOT...lol My personal feeling is that it's sad for the Democratic voters in Florida for if there's anyone whose fault this it NOT it's them. The candidates did agree to the change so I can't see how changing the rules after the fact could possibly be fair. I don't agree with either party's assessment that some states are "more important" than others and I'm a strong advocate for major changes in our nominating process.
What I guess I was throwing out there for discussion here is this - could there be a possibility that the GOP legislators in Florida may have had an ulterior motive in their decision to change the primary date, that motive being to make the Florida Democratic Party "look bad"?
Annie
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
20 Feb 08
I don't think there was any ulterior motive. I think it was just an attempt to make Florida votes count a little more in the primary election since a late primary makes them border on meaningless. All primaries should be held on the same date to avoid these problems.
The ballots should be of identical design, nationwide, to avoid confusion like the ballots that led to a large number of allegedly accidental votes for Buchanan. I never heard that the voters involved were Jewish, only that they were senior citizens since Palm Beach is filled with retired folks.
