Will Shrillary get away with an end run around the rules? I understood
that the DNC, with the blessing of both Democratic candidates, set a
starting date for when their primaries could start. Again, with the
blessing of both Democratic candidates, the rules clearly said that
states not following that rule would NOT have their votes counted.

What part of that does she not understand? I mean, I do and I'm only
a voter and not an experienced politician. Now, Shrillary is
comparing the votes in the states of FL and MI to slavery and women's
rights.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Clinton_compares_the_Florida_and_Michigan_fight_to_civil_rights_movement.html

Judity
My articles explaining Google's features
http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1123627
or read any of my other stories in the link below
http://judity.Writing.Com/

Will Shrillary get away with an end run around the rules? I understood
that the DNC, with the blessing of both Democratic candidates, set a
starting date for when their primaries could start. Again, with the
blessing of both Democratic candidates, the rules clearly said that
states not following that rule would NOT have their votes counted.

What part of that does she not understand? I mean, I do and I'm only
a voter and not an experienced politician. Now, Shrillary is
comparing the votes in the states of FL and MI to slavery and women's
rights.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Clinton_compares_the_Florida_and_Michigan_fight_to_civil_rights_movement.html

Judity
My articles explaining Google's features
http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1123627
or read any of my other stories in the link below
http://judity.Writing.Com/

Will Shrillary get away with an end run around the rules? I understood
that the DNC, with the blessing of both Democratic candidates, set a
starting date for when their primaries could start. Again, with the
blessing of both Democratic candidates, the rules clearly said that
states not following that rule would NOT have their votes counted.

What part of that does she not understand? I mean, I do and I'm only
a voter and not an experienced politician. Now, Shrillary is
comparing the votes in the states of FL and MI to slavery and women's
rights.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Clinton_compares_the_Florida_and_Michigan_fight_to_civil_rights_movement.html

Judity
My articles explaining Google's features
http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1123627
or read any of my other stories in the link below
http://judity.Writing.Com/

As a Florida voter--though because I am a independent I am disenfranchised
in the primaries anyway--I do not see why the DNC had the right to tell
any of the states when they could or could not hold their primaries.
Florida did vote--neither candidate campaigned, so probably a lot of
voters did not bother to vote, but a lot did and I see no reason not to
count their votes.

Now Michigan is another situation because Obama was not even on the
ballot--his name having been pulled. How can you count their votes--there
was essentially no vote.

I believe there should be a National primary held on the same day for
everyone, though I understand it would not be quite that simple, and would
probably involve run-off primaries. And I believe independents should
have the right to choose which primary they want to vote in without
"registering" as a member of a particular party. I am no longer a
Republican for many reasons, but I am not ready to call myself a Democrat.

Barb C.

IMO, it was a pretty stupid decision on the part of the DNC to begin with,
knowing that it would disenfranchise voters from whatever state that
decided to break the rules. This is one instance where they might have
been better off to consider the type of penalties the Republicans imposed.

It IS pretty maddening, though, for Hillary to go around trumpeting about
how strongly she feels about the voices of the voters in Florida and
Michigan NOW, when it would benefit her for those blatantly unfair
elections to be counted. It boggles my mind that people actually believe
she would be hopping up and down the same way had she lost those
elections, and how there can be even the smallest perception that those
votes were fair... <shaking head> The especially weird thing to me is the
perception some people seem to have that Obama is somehow responsible for
their votes not counting. Huh?????

Of course, it's slavery, I should have known!!! Silly me!! Geez, just
goes to show that the politicians will toss ANYTHING out there during an
election and see if anybody believes them. Unfortunately, some will.
Sigh...

Anne

"Judity" <Judity01 at (no spam) aol.com> wrote in message
news:93066ee2-ca93-4b90-86df-969d75f070ac at (no spam) d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Will Shrillary get away with an end run around the rules? I understood
that the DNC, with the blessing of both Democratic candidates, set a
starting date for when their primaries could start. Again, with the
blessing of both Democratic candidates, the rules clearly said that
states not following that rule would NOT have their votes counted.

What part of that does she not understand? I mean, I do and I'm only
a voter and not an experienced politician. Now, Shrillary is
comparing the votes in the states of FL and MI to slavery and women's
rights.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Clinton_compares_the_Florida_and_Michigan_fight_to_civil_rights_movement.html

Judity
My articles explaining Google's features
http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1123627
or read any of my other stories in the link below
http://judity.Writing.Com/

I like the idea of a national primary, or maybe even 2 or 3 waves of
primaries, with the states being drawn lottery-style as to who gets to have
their elections on which dates.

A lot of states let people vote in whichever primary they choose, but they
can only vote in one. I think that crossing the line and voting in the
other party's primary may change the voter's registered party affiliation,
but that's easily enough changed back if they so choose. I don't think
there's much question, though, that the primary system, particularly for
the Democratic party, needs to be overhauled!!

Anne

"Barbara Carlson" <bbcarlson at (no spam) snappydsl.net> wrote in message
news:-q2dnZVWcefGJqnVnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d at (no spam) tampabaydsl.com...
As a Florida voter--though because I am a independent I am
disenfranchised in the primaries anyway--I do not see why the DNC had the
right to tell any of the states when they could or could not hold their
primaries. Florida did vote--neither candidate campaigned, so probably a
lot of voters did not bother to vote, but a lot did and I see no reason
not to count their votes.

Now Michigan is another situation because Obama was not even on the
ballot--his name having been pulled. How can you count their
votes--there was essentially no vote.

I believe there should be a National primary held on the same day for
everyone, though I understand it would not be quite that simple, and
would probably involve run-off primaries. And I believe independents
should have the right to choose which primary they want to vote in
without "registering" as a member of a particular party. I am no longer
a Republican for many reasons, but I am not ready to call myself a
Democrat.

Barb C.

Will Shrillary get away with an end run around the rules? I understood
that the DNC, with the blessing of both Democratic candidates, set a
starting date for when their primaries could start. Again, with the
blessing of both Democratic candidates, the rules clearly said that
states not following that rule would NOT have their votes counted.

What part of that does she not understand? I mean, I do and I'm only
a voter and not an experienced politician. Now, Shrillary is
comparing the votes in the states of FL and MI to slavery and women's
rights.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Clinton_compares_the_Florida_and_Michigan_fight_to_civil_rights_movement.html

Judity
My articles explaining Google's features
http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1123627
or read any of my other stories in the link below
http://judity.Writing.Com/

To answer your question . . . no; she has no shame and doesn't believe in
playing by the rules. If she were president she would be a disaster
waiting to happen . . . and it wouldn't take her long.

No kidding, it was stupid of DNC and stupid of her but very tactical to
leave her name on the ballots.

--
Sue -- Firefighter mom -- still rabid UW DAWG fan!

I love the UK sense of humor. At least I hope they are joking.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23486569-details/Clinton+campaign's+new+strategy+...+vote+for+Chelsea+in+2016/article.do

Why not run the unmarried Bush daughter against her and have a true
Clinton/Bush dynasty fight?

Judity

I think that number was mistaken; I saw that yesterday as well, then
later on saw several retractions. The debt is closer to "only" $20
million!

"Anne V." <ahvasquez at (no spam) NOSPAMsbcglobal.net> wrote in
news:H4gZj.133$ZE5.37 at (no spam) nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com:

I think that number was mistaken; I saw that yesterday as well, then
later on saw several retractions. The debt is closer to "only" $20
million!

What's said is this - when McCain's campaign wasn't bringing in enough,
people hired to work with him got fired, layed off, etc. and those who
were
still working, like my mother, didn't get paid what they were due for
MONTHS. All the while, she was being told that many were having to make
sacrifices for this worthy candidate to get elected. Heck, sacrifice my
electric bill, sacrifice my meds, sacrifice my own personal expenditures
so
someone else, who now has proven he cannot manage a campaign and hire the
right people to stick to a budget and not spend it before it comes
in????....I don't think so!!! It's a shame but I feel that if they
cannot
manage a campaign, they sure as heck cannot manage a country.