Nice to see this in print

[2 of 3]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/14/beckfloridamichigan/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

[mervap]

Normally, I think Glenn Beck is abrasive and annoying...unfortunately, this time, he's also basically right.

[TrllVl90]

Glenn was on Jay Leno's new show a bit back and I watched it skeptically awaiting the moment where I get over frustrated by his political spewings and.....that moment never came. He was surprisingly level-headed and made a lot of good points. I don't recall the date he was on, but if you can find it online I'd suggest watching it.

[lampie1970]

What did Florida and Michigan do to break the rules? What are the rules?

[mervap]

From Wiki...



In August 2006, the Democratic National Committee adopted a proposal by its Rules and Bylaws Committee stating that only the four states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina would be permitted to hold primaries or caucuses before February 5, 2008.[51] In May 2007, the Florida Legislature passed a bill that moved the date of the state's primary to January 29, 2008, setting up a confrontation with the DNC.[52] In response, the DNC ruled that Florida's 185 pledged delegates and 26 superdelegates would not be seated at the Democratic National Convention, or, if seated, would not be able to vote.[53] In October 2007, Democrats from Florida's congressional delegation filed a federal lawsuit against the DNC to force a recognition of its delegates, but the suit was unsuccessful.[51][54] The presidential candidates promised not to campaign in Florida.


Meanwhile, Michigan moved its primary to January 15, 2008, also in violation of party rules. In October 2007, Obama, Richardson, Biden, and Edwards withdrew their names from the Michigan primary ballot, under pressure from the DNC and voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.[55] Kucinich unsuccessfully sought to remove his name from the ballot,[56] whereas Clinton and Dodd opted to remain on the ballot.[57] In December 2007, the DNC ruled that Michigan's 128 pledged delegates and 29 superdelegates would not count in the nominating contest unless it were held on a later date.[58] The Michigan Democratic party responded with a press release noting that the primary would proceed with Clinton, Dodd, Gravel, and Kucinich on the ballot. Supporters of Biden, Edwards, Richardson, and Obama were urged to vote "uncommitted" instead of writing in their candidates' names because write-in votes for those candidates would not be counted.


That was the dispute in a nutshell....

[lampie1970]

OoooooooooK...but what difference does it make when they have the thingy...uh primary thingy? or is it just a principle sort of thing where they were told not to and they did it anyway?

AND WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT? does it slant a vote? or garner support for one vs the other?

[mervap]

The theory is that the earlier primaries can have a larger influence in that they show which candidates are more viable than others. Look at Iowa and New Hampshire: two states that rank near the bottom middle in terms of population, but get a HUGE amount of press coverage during primary season because they are the first two. If a candidate doesn't show enough appeal in those primaries, they might drop out or "suspend" their campaigns. Thus, a very small amount of people can affect the outcome of an election in a way far larger than a state whose primary is later.

Michigan and Florida are VERY populous states, so they wanted to move closer to the beginning, but the choice isn't theirs to make...that process had taken place a long time before then and was determined by the Democratic Party. Those two states changed their minds and held them early.....