Comments on: No Re-Vote in Florida; Michigan up in the Air

By: Farris Wilson

Farris Wilson — Fri, 21 Mar 2025 19:24:03 +0000

Once AGAIN Florida screwed up. Only when we have REPUBLICATION’S IN OFFICE. I have a right for my vote to count. However, here in Florida, seem’s we never have rights. I know that the Democrats approved this vote push up. But, did anyone asked the PEOPLE?????????? WHY WON’T OUR GOVERNER LET US HAVE A REVOTE????????????? Says it cost too much. Well, let us voter’s be heard. And someone, like all Floridians, all stand up for ourselves.
Now our State votes no longer counts for the highest office in Government. We shouldn’t have to pay anymore FEDERAL INCOME TAX. Hey, Florida, get my hint. We are not even a State in the United States. UNITED, I have too laugh…………..

]]>

By: Dr. Steven Taylor

Dr. Steven Taylor — Wed, 19 Mar 2025 13:50:28 +0000

Point taken. Of course, when I say “Florida” and “Michigan” I mean not only the state parties, but the state governments (who, of course, had to approve these moves).

At the end of the day, of course, the voters of said states are the losers.

]]>

By: Barry

Barry — Wed, 19 Mar 2025 13:46:50 +0000

Dr. Taylor: “Second, there is the defiance of clearly stated rules by Florida and Michigan (on the assumption, I guess, that all would eventually be forgiven). ”

Dr. Taylor, I’d like to correct a teeeeeny little error there (speaking as a Michigan Democrat): ‘Michigan’ and ‘Florida’ didn’t do jack; neither the land masses, the populations nor the governments. The leadership of the state parties did stuff - not us.

]]>

By: Skeptic

Skeptic — Wed, 19 Mar 2025 01:32:38 +0000

The Democrats are too screw up. I can’t believe they wouldn’t count Florida and Michigan votes. Who do they think they are? This year I am voting with Florida and Michigan, for the Republicans.

]]>

By: mary

mary — Tue, 18 Mar 2025 19:22:50 +0000

We are very angry Democrats right now. if those votes don’t count, there will be no nicey nice.. we will defect our party.

read my forum at:

http://hillaryisourchoice.com/simplemachinesforum/?topic=54.0

and this is a petition link

]]>

By: Daniel from Michigan

Daniel from Michigan — Tue, 18 Mar 2025 19:21:30 +0000

Look, just because Hillary finds herself in a losing situation, does not mean that she can rearrange the DNC rules to suit her needs. This is disingenuous to her party, and she is ruining her chances of being on her “Dream Ticket.”
I am a Michigan voter, and it was Jennifer Granholm (a Hillary supporter) who decided to go against DNC rules to move the primary ahead. I voted, although uncommitted, I felt pretty damn good about it. It is disingenuous to suggest that all Michigan voters are somehow “disenfranchised,” when it is a deliberate “speech act” (see John L. Austin) and attempt to twist and turn things around to work in her favor. This is the politics of the past, and you can NOT DISSUADE Obama voters who listen to the TRUTH - we represent the future of American politics. Join the Movement or be left behind.

]]>

By: MSS

MSS — Tue, 18 Mar 2025 17:25:32 +0000

There are still further elements of the absurdity. I’ll focus only on Michigan, given the news about Florida.

Michigan chose to go early on the theory that it would have maximum influence. Indeed, Edwards and various other candidates still had active campaigns then, so the state might have had a chance to winnow the field, or to keep it a 3-way race a bit longer. We’ll never know.

Now they propose to vote at the end, which is another way to maximize a state’s influence. Of course, one can have maximum influence early only if there are multiple candidates (thus your state gets a chance to winnow) and late only if the race is not yet concluded (thus, in theory, your state gets to deliver a knock-out blow).

Why should Michigan voters, but nowhere else, get a second crack at this influence-maximizing opportunity?

Another thing I have been wondering is if the state party would be bound to use the same allocation rules as before? How “proportional” does the party require the allocation to be? Obviously, if they could be made to give a greater boost to the candidate with the most votes, any late-voting state becomes that much more important. But, of course, the state party wouldn’t defy the national on this point. Would it?

]]>