Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger First article from May 4th: <a href="http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05/04/State/State_seizes_primary_.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05 /04/State/State_seizes_primary_.shtml</a> <<<quotes>>> Florida muscled to the forefront of the presidential primary Thursday by setting a Jan. 29 election date against the wishes of political party leaders across the country. Florida becomes the first of the mega states to hold a presidential primary, but now could face sanctions from national Democratic and Republican parties, which had carefully arranged the primary schedule. The national parties are promising to punish any state that breaks the party rules, as Florida has, by scheduling a primary before Feb. 5, 2008. Both parties will lose half the delegates to the national convention, and the Democratic Party has said any candidate who campaigns in a state violating the schedule will forfeit all delegates won in that state. <<<end quotes>>> And the follow up from May 9th: <a href="http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05/09/State/Dems__primary_may_not.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05 /09/State/Dems__primary_may_not.shtml</a> <<<quotes>>> What if Democratic voters turned out for a presidential primary in Florida and their vote didn't count? No, this isn't a Katherine Harris joke. It's an option national Democratic leaders are seriously considering as they grapple with Florida's newly scheduled 2008 presidential primary date, which could upend the national primary process and produce yet another weird Florida election. Consider the scenario: On Jan. 29, Florida Republicans and Democrats head to the polls to pick presidential nominees. Republican votes count, just as you would expect, but the results for Democrats would be nonbinding. No delegates would be awarded based upon the results and instead party activists and insiders would decide on some later date how to divvy up the state's more than 200 delegates to the Democratic national convention. It's not so far-fetched. "I think it's much higher than 50-50 that we will make Jan. 29 a nonbinding" election, said Jon Ausman, a veteran Democratic organizer in Tallahassee and member of the Democratic National Committee. <<<end quotes>>> What all this says to me is that our two parties really do collude to run this country according to their own agenda. There's *got* to be some criminal law that would apply to this. And if there isn't, why not?
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Didn't California just change their primary date too? Are they getting the same threats? Frankly, get rid of the primaries and have a national election where the person with the most votes wins. Brilliant!
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger California changed it to Feb. 5th - the earliest date that the parties would allow without penalties. Again that's "the earliest date *BOTH* parties would allow". These guys are in lock-step with each other.
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger It is a bit misleading. Sorry about that. I was trying to make it short enough to avoid having it truncated. But it's only misleading in that the decision isn't final yet. Note that one member of the DNC calls the odds "better than 50-50".
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger So, what do you think about the fact that Florida's primary election may be considered nonbinding by one of the major parties?
Originally Posted By jonvn well, does it really matter? Won't the people who go vote however they want?
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Whoa. It occurs to me I haven't seen admins here in quite some time - a good thing. Did Beau or "Beauette" come back?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Whoa. It occurs to me I haven't seen admins here in quite some time - a good thing. Did Beau or "Beauette" come back?" Exactly. While the rest of us may have some sharp and sharper disagreements, the deletions are few and far between. Then look what happens.
Originally Posted By jonvn That's because the rest of us, while we may really disagree to an extreme amount, and not particularly enjoy certain tactics, are simply not nuts. The guy is flat out nuts.
Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger I think we were hitting the "Report to moderator" button so fast that we backed-up the reporting queue. I think that's why the deletions stopped for a while and he was allowed to run rampant. I emailed Doobie and Dave and the red ink dam broke a few minutes later.
