Democratic Punishment?
I find it really strange that the democratic party is punishing certain states for moving their primaries. While I can see it may be difficult for candidates find time to visit these states where they werent planning to campaign so early, it seems non-democratic to not acknowledge the voters of certain states and still consider the outcome candidate legitimate. These states in particular tend to decide elections, and I would think that the democratic party come election time wouldn't want the voters of these states to resent the party for not considering their votes. This could really be the downfall of the democratic nominee. It seems as though the party is more concerned with controling what is going on than reaching a desired outcome. The article we just read about the vulnerability of representatives talked a lot about how our parties are losing power in a way, and our candidates are being viewed as individuals rather than as representatives of a party. This may be the party's way of saying "hey look, we're still here and we have some control over what's going on."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Isn't it funny that the Democrats claim to want "every vote to count" but are ready to disenfranchise the people of 2 large, key states. Just imagine the coverage this would get if the RNC did this! It would dwarf what happened in 2000.
I don't understand either why the Democratic party is punishing certain states for moving their primaries. I agree that many of the voters in FL may resent the Democratic party for not considering their votes. I can't imagine that the Democratic party wants this especially since Fl is a major state in the election.
Post a Comment