CNN

Michigan has voted for a democratic presidential candidate at least the last two elections. This vote to not count our votes in our primary makes me want to vote for a republican!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do people realize why we have a House AND a Senate. Small states need a voice too. Do NH and IA need to be the first every time? No, but only other small states should. How else would our voice ever matter when we have so few delegates. I think a rotating schedule would be fair, only if you excluded larger states. You people from California who think it would be fair for you to have the most amount of delegates and get the first primary are ridiculous no candidate would ever care about ND, SD, DE, VT, NH, ID or all the other states with a small amount of delegates. This is why there is a House of Reps and a Senate. The little guys need a voice too, if there was not a Senate California, Texas and New York would control the entire Legislative branch and if they voted first they would essentially decide the president. So being from NH I really don't really care much about being first unless it's stopping the more populous states from thinking they're better than everyone else and squelching the voice of the little guy. Let's rotate first primaries with smaller states and let them get their voices heard and then let the big guys throw their massive amount of delegates around.

Why is everyone trashing the Dems? Reps made the same kind of move to seat only 1/2 the delegates of any state before Feb 5, INCLUDING NH, SC, NV, etc..... anyways the delegates will likely all be seated when a nominee is picked. Get a grip people. Independent voters like myself don't even get to participate in the nominee selection process half the time.

VERY ANGRY IN NEWAYGO, MICHIGAN

How dare Legislators, put my right to have a say in the presidential candidates at risk. Why wasn't changing the date of the presidential primary put to a vote. You have a lot of very angry constituents here in Michigan. I for one will remember my Representatives names and vote no on them and anything they push for a vote on . I will bad mouth them at every turn. That is ONE RIGHT of mine they will NOT take away.

Joan Davis

Compromise that could help ALL parties (Dems/Reps/Grns/Indpndts):

REGIONAL primaries, in this order...SE,Southwest,NW,Northeast.

1. IA & NH... If the DNC/RNC want to continue to honor these 1st 2 Northern states, fine. **That's why the Northern 2 weeks are set up to be the 3rd and 4th weeks. That still leaves 48 states up for grabs – 12 each week.

SE = FL,GA,SC,NC,VA,WV,KY,TN,AL,MS,LA,AR
SW = HI,CA,AZ,NM,TX,OK,MO,KN,NE,CO,UT,NV
NW = IN,IL,WI,MN,ND,SD,WY,MN,ID,OR,WA,AK
NE = ME,VT,MA,RI,CT,NY,NJ,DE,MD,PA,OH,MI

2. While a national 1-day primary is efficient for the voter, it would be a logistical nightmare for EVERY candidate – and cost-prohibitive for those with less-funds. *If voters REALLY want a choice within their party, there needs to be inclusion of candidates with more dynamic policies.

3. This 1 month whould shorten the nominating process enough that under-funded or less charismatic candidates have (at least the first round) to inform us about their POLICIES.

4. The 4 contiguous regions above also aid in the following ways...
A) more cost-effectiveness for candidates – allowing more to remain in the race longer, giving a truer test of "electability"
B) providing a better sense of regional preferences, as many neighboring states share similar ideologies.

People think that it's the Dems in Michigan.It's the Independants in MICHIGAN,which most people in the state are who put this preasure on the state officials.People in MICHIGAN have lost faith in either party and are hoping moderets from either party become candidates.Most people in the state are not affiliated with either party.The last successful 3rd party was started in Michigan(Republican Party).The people of the state are not into social arguments.They want to talk about Economy,Enviroment,and personnel freedoms,etc

I think the DNC was within its rights.
Personally, there is not a Democrat or Republican who has earned my vote. They are as dumb as the elected in Lansing.

Posted By John, Michigan : December 3, 2007 10:29 am

The DNC might be with in their rights, but not make it a smart political move move on their behalf. So they alienate two states that they need to carry in the general elections and in the process do nothing to help elect the Democratic canidate, big deal they were within their rights.

Let's screw everything up, the primary dates then can be determined by the date the state became a state of entry, that's your primary date. Think they would shout then.

Hey! Here's a novel idea...

LET'S ALL VOTE ON THE SAME DAY!!

I think the DNC was within its rights.
Personally, there is not a Democrat or Republican who has earned my vote. They are as dumb as the elected in Lansing.

Let's see, John Dean provided that he could be the front runner and blow an election through stupid antics. Here we go again, this time the DNC, beginning to think it is George W Bush pissing off two states its candiates will need in the general election if they are determined to win the Presidency.

I am sorry I thought the elections were held by state governments not the RNC or the DNC.

Keep it up and welcome in the GOP for another 4 years.

The DNC should be ashamed of themselves. This is a Democracy afterall. And to say that two states are invisible in the Democratic process because they wanted to move their primaries up is a sad day for the DNC. I am so glad I switched to being an Independent.

Iowa and New Hampshire being the first two states every four years is silly. These two states do not respresent the makeup of America. I do not understand why the primary calendar can not be changed to allow more states to have a say in the early process. But, it will be over by February 5, so Iowa and New Hamphire will not be able to hog the spotlight for too long.

In my opinion, we should limit the lead time for our presidential campaign to one year at most. With short memory span, most people won't remember what happened three months ago, never mind 2 or 3 years ahead.

These senator and governor candidates are not doing their jobs in their full capacity during this long campaign period. It is a disservice to the voters they represent.

A totally outrageous usurpation of the democratic process - essentially telling the people in Michigan and Florda that their vote doesn't count. Isn't this the kind of election-rigging behavior the Dems have accused the Republicans of? More and more, I grow disgusted with the Democratic party.

"This is about the Democrats not wanting to actually win the election. Just like Gore giving up when he won, or kerry allowing cheating and the same trickery in Florida again. They don't want to be held responsible, they want to moan from the sidelines." – Jaik , chicago, IL

Jaik, perhaps you remember that the Florida vote was being recounted by the Florida Supreme Court when the five Conservative Republicans on the Federal Supreme Court ordered that the counting of votes be stopped. As for Kerry in 2004, he lost Florida by 381,000 votes. He lost the general election by over 3 million votes. The professional politicians in the Democratic party are just as hungry for victory, power, status, and fame as are the Republicans. Your comment has absolutely no basis in reality, so I assume it was meant as sardonic or sarcastic.

This is about the Democrats not wanting to actually win the election. Just like Gore giving up when he won, or kerry allowing cheating and the same trickery in Florida again. They don't want to be held responsible, they want to moan from the sidelines.

In other early state news, McCain got a major endorsement today from a conservative influential New Hampshire newspaper, while Clinton trails Obama in yet another Iowa poll.

People are getting all agitated at the DNC, but do people realize the DNC is a ntaional political party. The state delegates belong to that party, and the State legislature should have nothing to say over the matter!

Out national political parties need to be independent of state governments. Howard Dean is the best thing to happen to Democrats in a long time.

Tired of being unhappy dems? Switch parties….>

The survey found that 58 percent of Republicans polled reported having excellent mental health. Only 38 percent of Democrats and 43 percent of Independents reported the same."
Posted By Bob NY : December 1, 2007 3:35 pm

I highlighted the key words in your post: Republicans self-diagnose themselves as having better mental health. It would be interesting to see if statistics from actual health care professionals reflected that same trend – though I doubt many doctors bother to ask the political affiliations of their patients, so there probably isn't much data to work with.

I looked up the Gallup data, and if you lump together those who report their mental health as excellent OR good, 93% of Republicans view their health positively, while 83% of independents and 84% of Democrats do so. This is a much less significant difference, especially when you take into consideration the margins for error in polling.

My personal opinion is that Democrats and independents had a lot of reason over the last few years to feel frustrated and depressed, watching the GOP drive the country over a cliff. This would certainly account for some of the results. And, of course, the people still clinging to their GOP party identification aren't likely to be up for much self-analysis or introspection – otherwise they'd constantly be running into the cognitive dissonance of being associated with a party of fiscally reckless war-mongering radicals.

It would be interesting if Gallup could go back to their data from the 1990s, and see how the GOP identifiers reported their mental health during the Clinton administration. I remember the GOP faithful of those years as being driven completely insane by Bubba, accepting every rumor and innuendo about him as the gospel truth, regardless of any lack of proof. If Gallup found the GOP self-reporting of their mental health in the 1990s as significantly positive, we'd know that their current analysis probably isn't worth any additional comment.

It appears the "Blue dogs" want to get the old caucus system back. That is to say, in both the state organizations and
the DNC. By the way, some states still use the caucus: their primaries are merely "advisory".

What is there about wanting to be "first"? The most important is that people get a chance to meet the candidates and not by "long distance"

Later states might have advantage in that the issues are more crystallized,
the candidacies are more developed.

Best advice: Invest in the confetti companies. That is as much sense it all makes.

It's disgusting to see the Democratic Party playing divisive politics amongst it's own party line. They couldn't pull off a unified front in '04 and they seem to be tripping on their own shoelaces in '08. Maybe it's time for the third party to be taken seriously.

What I find interesting is people critcizing the DNC. Doesn't this article quote a Michigan official as saying its for the "prinple"? Not to mention, they were warned ahead of time that they shouldn't do this. Why get into ego matches? What is really odd is their "principle": the almighty dollar. They claim that it really is about trying to make a better nationally, i.e. why should Iowa, a predominately white state, have such an impact, etc. I didn't realize that Michigan had more of an Asian, Hispanic or Bosnian population than all states and were ethnically the most diverse in the country. As a far north state that thrives on the auto industry, how would it answer that it gives proper representation to tobacco and cotton farming states or the oil states, or even the proper representation for Silicon Valley? The real reason, however, is that Michigan wants the money and publicity that comes with the early status.. just a few small time politicians trying to claim national status. Ultimately, some schedule does need to be set, or all 50 states could someday be doing their primaries and caucuses the day after election day for the previous election. Where does it end? Should New York be allowed to go before Michigan- afterall they are quite diverse and arguably more worthy given its financial status. What about California, the most populous state? The idiocy could continue forever, so what is that principle again Michigan? Oh yeah, money and fame. I forgot, how patriotic!

Primaries do not take into account the political stance of a large portion of the public. Only the entitled few are allowed to vote in them, and through them their special interests are achieved. The sad thing is that these primary results will influence who becomes president more than the general election itself. Why should the date matter. Primaries must have an unseen impact that the average voter does not understand, and certain individuals would like to keep it that way for their own gains.

There is a simple solution. Let states hold off the results of primaries until all states have voted.

Sue the freaking DNC for disenfranchising voters, the creeps. How dare they? The Democrats *deserve* to lose the election if they do stupid antics like this. This should go right to the Supreme Court.

As a die-hard Michigan Dem, I am furious at both sides. Yes, the calendar makes no sense and needs to change. So Michigan Dems played a game of chicken with the DNC and, despite the fact that it's been obvious for a long time they were going to lose, drove right off the cliff anyway. As a matter of "principle," Debbie Dingell sacrificed my right to vote.

An even less reported fact is that, in Michigan, write-in votes don't count if the candidate has not officially registered a write-in campaign, meaning that I can't go vote for Obama even as a symbolic gesture - no one will count my vote.

Again, I agree that the calendar needs to change. NH and IA have been incredibly pigheaded about this, as has the DNC. But please, why did my vote have to be a casualty in this pissing match?

It is time to take America Back from these greedy aristocrats. America was founded as a REPUBLIC ! Yet here we are lining up to bring DEMOCRACY to the world, (aka MOB RULE) seriously do you care what 51% of americans beleive if it is not what you beleive? how is that fair?
We were meant to be FREE FROM TYRANNY! ...but here we are knee deep in phoney elections, and laws that offer CITIZENS zero protection from the tyrants! Do yourself a favor google sr 1959 or hr 1955, and think about the situation at clintons headquarters. They are trying to SCARE us out of the US Constitution.

There is only one candidate who will restore the law of the land and lower the guns aimed at the people (like BLACKWATERS guns that are on hand to keep AMERICANS in line if need be, google blackwater hurricane katrina)

when you give up your liberty for safety YOU WILL GET NEITHER! (and the as the saying goes, you deserve neither)

Look at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Dick Cheney as well as Michelle Obama are members, Condi, Kissinger, Clinton, Edwards, Biden, Guiliani, Richardson,

Look at their agenda, who began it, why it remains so hush hush? Cheney even mentioned that he went out of his way to hide the fact that he was a member while campaigning.

We have been told that people hate us for our freedoms, yet we have allowed this government (congress especially, they have laid down to bushco) to strip us of them.
It makes no sense and yet perfect sense at the same time.

DO YOUR HOMEWORK AMERICA NEEDS YOU!

VOTE 4 RON PAUL!!!!!

Screw Dr. Dean and the party fascistas. The convention will be an after-the-fact party celebrating either the death wish of nominating an unelectable Hillary or Obama, or else the wise decision of Democratic voters not to lose the White House.

This in-party bickering is certainly alienating this (mostly liberal) voter. If the democrats can't even agree on a primary schedule, how can we expect them to actually accomplish anything once elected?

What does Naomi Wolfe have to say now that it is Democrats that aren't letting Democrat votes count?

Is there a misunderstanding here between the delegates from a state not counting in the primary election for a specific party, as opposed to the final presidential election in November? It seems like some people think that the electoral college that follows the November election will be impacted by all this, but it is referring to the selection of which candidate among the Democrats will be selected to be on that ballot in November. After the primaries, delegates from the states go to the National Convention for their party, this is where they are saying that FL and MI delegates won't count, for violating the primary schedule. Since most major candidates besides Clinton took their names off the ballot in MI anyway, it really doesn't impact much. It won't impact the November election between the parties at all. It is kind of ironic that in general the Democrats are disregarding the votes after fussing over every vote counting in the past. But then that doesn't surprise me, because it is politics and on both sides of the aisle, many say what suites them in the moment and change their tune according to the audience or situation. Power corrupts. All that said, we still have the best form of government worldwide even though it isn't perfect.

I live in Georgia but I am affected by these immature people. This is not 2nd grade playground. Both sides need seriously TALK to each other & work it out. There are how many millions of people in the world today who have never seen an election booth & these relatively few people are quibbling over a date on a calender!?!

Michelle and others… what you loose out on in a one-day national primary is the personal contact with candidates.

So you're effectively saying that, not only is it OK to disenfranchise the vast majority of the country, but it's actually a good idea. Instead of allowing voters across the country to have a say in the primary process, just hand the reins over to voters in a few states. Surely they'll have everyone's best interests at heart.

It reminds me a lot of Animal Farm: All voters are created equal, but some are more equal than others. Really what we're talking about here is discrimination. Let's give one group of voters more power than another. When will we wake up and realize that the government-sponsored discrimination is a really bad idea.

People on this board are making no sense. Michigan and Florida KNEW that they would have their delegates stripped if they move up their primaries, but they did it anyway! Your anger should not be with the DNC, but with the sad leadership of these states. Imagine if your boss told you to do something, and you did something completely opposite, you would have to deal with the consequences. Also, this isnt just a democrat problem, republicans are doing the same thing and also being punished for moving up their primaries. Please do research before you post ignorant comments people.

Dingell says "this is all about principal" but nothing in politics is about principal (least of all in the Democratic party), so it's got to be about political edge. Let's call a spade a spade.

To those who blame the DNC for all of this, why aren't you equally angry with your state democrats for not following the rules in the first place? It seems to me that Florida and Michigan state representives are caring about something other than our vote.

This is why Carl Levin and his ilk should be voted out of office! Michigan voters get screwed because of a desire to have more influence, as if purposely pissing off the DNC was a good idea? And the DNC should be called the Disenfranchisement National Committee for screwing Michigan voters by not allowing the delegates to attend. The Republicans are not better, only allowing half the delegates to the convention but there's enough blame to go around. Apparently making news headlines is more important to Michigan's lawmakers than having a rightful say in the nominee. Way to go, Carl!

I'll vote for the first time this primary and in the general election and I sure as hell will be voting for state's rights, freedom, and liberty, ergo RON PAUL.

Michelle and others... what you loose out on in a one-day national primary is the personal contact with candidates. If you live in Iowa now, the odds are good that you can actually meet the candidates! (BTW, I think Iowans do a great job of learning about the candidates and they actually CAUCUS! That means they get together in meetings all over the state and debate the candidates. It's not just a blind vote, but an important social process. It's not something that Florida or Michigan are prepared to do.)

If you spread the primary season out over 5 months (January – May) and had 10 states per month, more states would matter and the candidate would have more time to spend in your state. Again, I think this should rotate so that each state has a chance to be earlier in the election cycle.

It would be detrimental to our country if the candidates only campaign through TV ads and stadium size speeches. They should have to work for it... go all over the country and meet people. It should be a process, not a one day event!

Hope these new developments can be really useful...

Pierluigi Rotundo

It's a state issue and to disenfranchise a state is "undemocratic". If Michigan wants to do it, more power to them. I don't understand why they don't just pick a few dates and have a few states on each of those dates. If Iowa and New Hampshire feel they don't have any influence over the big states like NY or California...well, then move to NY or California.

Democrats have a great opportunity this year. I'm afraid they may blow it like they did in 2004. Obama & Clinton attacking each other. Edwards saying some pretty nasty things. Then this...disenfranching people...if I were a resident of Michigan or Florida – I'd be pretty pissed off and may cause me to not vote at all...not what the party needs.

DEMOCRATS DON'T BLOW IT LIKE YOU ALWAYS SEEM TO DO...

I think it is wonderful! Won't be long and we can just do away with the primaries and just let the DNC appoint the candidate. Sure will save a lot of money and probably half of the voters won't even notice..........

I think the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, and Chairman Howard Dean should be replaced immediately.

The Democratic Party has the chance in the next election of increasing majorities in both houses of Congress, and retaking the White House. To do that we need Michigan and Florida. And not just Democrats, Independents as well. What is this lunacy doing to help party building???

I understand that each state chairman was given the chance to move their dates forward, and only Iowa, New Hampshire, etc. etc. etc. The fact remains that neither the DNC or RNC pays for the election; nor do they set state election schedules. That is the domain of the individual state legislatures and in some cases Secretaries of State. Until the DNC pays for the band, they cannot call the tune.

Regardless, this is a case of pique by the DNC against the individual states; it is extremely childish and it could cost the Democrats the election.

Fire Howard Dean and the Rule and Bylaws Committee NOW!

steven, i agree with you somewhat...we should definitely rotate states out every election. great idea.

but i disagree that all primaries in one day would be a bad thing. with the campaiging starting roughly in 2006, what more do you need to know about the candidates? especially if you have primaries in the spring, that's plenty of time and plenty of time for the winners to prepare for november. plus i like the idea of making it a national holiday! hey, it could get more people to vote even.

Tired of being unhappy dems? Switch parties....>

"A roundup of Gallup health polls over the past four years finds that Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to report having excellent mental health.

The survey found that 58 percent of Republicans polled reported having excellent mental health. Only 38 percent of Democrats and 43 percent of Independents reported the same."

Hey, Dan, TX (December 1, 2007 2:46 pm)

FYI, to answer your question the DNC *did* take care of all this back in 2005/2006. All the states voted on a primary calendar, and every state had a chance to move their primary up.

The state delegates voted on a primary schedule and now some states (MI & FL) are not honoring the outcome of that vote.

*that* is why the state primaries will not count.

I disagree with Brett and agree with Marty. You cannot hold all the primaries on one day because no one will actually get to know the candidates. It must be spread out over several months. Even Super Tuesday is harmful for America b/c it favors corporate, impersonal campaigning.

What would be fair, however is to rotate every election the 4-5 states that come first. So if we have Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada this election, next election it could be Michigan, Florida, New Mexico and Alaska (or something like that). Keep rotating until everyone gets a chance to be first.

Wouldn't this be possible? Any else see the logic or illogic in this argument?

What concerns me most is that another article about this states that at a later date the winner in Michigan and Florida would fight to get the delegates seated at the convention anyway. That most certainly would NOT be fair. And how come ole Hillary didn't take her name off...so she could win and later get the delegates later???

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071201/ap_on_el_pr/primary_scramble

As far as I'm concerned, each state should be able to hold their primaries whenever they want to. Or have all states hold primaries on the same day just as presidential election is. How hard can this be...it's not "rocket science" to figure it out. And all Americans have the right to have their votes count. But if the DNC ok's Michigan and Florida...Obama and Edwards MUST be put back on the ballots! If the winner in those states later get the delegates by whinning and crying about it, then there needs to be a re-vote with all candidates put back on

Why didn't these states get this settled in 2005, or 2006. Why did they wait to the last minute to mess up their primaries. Seems like the democrat leaders in those states really were not thinking.

Can the Democrats win the White House without the support of Florida and Michigan. I think not. This should get very interesting. It is about time that someone besides Iowa and New Hampsire decided who "cannot" be president.

What happened to the Democrats insistance that EVERY vote be counted. Looks like they one want that when it is "convenient" to them

Michigan and Florida, 40+ electoral votes, Iowa, New Hampshire 20. Your call, Dumbocrats. Looks like I'm voting Independent.

The DNC trampling on states rights...why are people surprised by this? After all, the Democrat platform is based on Federal/national power over State/local/individual power.

Kind of funny that one DNC segment is surprised by the national DNC's tyrannical actions. Sort of shines a light on the DNC's opinion of individual thought, doesn't it?

Nobody knows voter disenfranchisement like the DNC, their enlightened.. Or is this pay back for last terms election results?? One thing is for sure, this wouldn't happen to California or New York, you can bet your electorial votes on that..

Ha Ha!!

Hey Democrats,

Have you heard the outcome of a 4 year poll by Gallop? Evidently, Republicans, by far, have better mental health than Democrats and Independents. You may want to switch your party affiliation.

This is the party of every vote except when there mad at you. My 2 year old acts like that. I agree with the poster who said hold them all on the same day. And make the national election a holiday so no one has an excuse not to vote. The best thing to do would be to limit election season to 2 months before the election. Perhaps the people will not be so turned off by the process.

Just sitting here watching the CNN/YouTube Republican debate rerun on CNN today. And you know what, it is quite different when you know the questioners are not what CNN is representing them to be..

Great job CNN but unfortunate for you, Americans are now able to find out the real story fast enough to call your bias for what it is.. Repugnant political interference.

This whole process is moronic anyway. Too bad the average American is too dumb to realize that they can vote for anyone they want to....it's called a write in vote. The hell with the democrats and the republicans....both of the parties are so crooked anyway....

what is wrong with these states like Michigan and Florida that they can't stick to the darn rules??!!

The primary schedule was voted on fair and square by *all* states including Michigan over a year ago.

If this was truly about principle as Michigan says – then they would stick to the rules! Instead they would rather shoot themselves in the foot – not because of "principle," but because of arrogance.

Do not worry Floridians and Michaginites (or Michiganeronians or Michiganers, whatever you are)

At the convention, your delegates will find a seat. None of the presidential candidates will allow either of your critical states to be snubbed. If it were Alabama or Idaho – which are going to go Republican even if Michael Jackson is the Republican Presidential nominee and Osama bin Laden is the VP candidate – it might be a different story. No Democrat can win without Florida and Michigan. You will have plenty of clout and the convention will vote to seat your delegates.

Hey Dean
Hooooyaaaaaa
You and your stupid DNC have made the dems laughing stocks.

And everyone talks about how bad the Republicans are, the Dems just said FU to an entire state. Politics at its finest. Michigan should become a part of Canada, I'd consider a move to the UP if that happened.

Simple:

Step 1) Hold all primaries on the same day.
Step 2) Make it a holiday, along with the national election, so no-one has any excuse for not being able to go vote.
Step 3) There is no step 3. Every state then has equal influence.

Done.

dems must not feel they need these states. o well,, ok with me

Look I know that on the surface, this doesn't seem fair, or even smart politically. Florida and Michigan, 2 electoral vote-rich states, both with far more diverse populations than Iowa and New Hampshire, are being unilaterally stripped of their votes by the DNC, while the RNC panders to their candidates (they talk the talk, but will probably do nothing when the convention comes around).
But we have to look at this from a different standpoint. I am a critic of then entire primary process, mainly because it focuses too much emphasis on money and the candidate, and not enough about the policies. It is too image-based and not party-based.
The candidate should represent the party, not the other way around. Part of the reason why our party structures are so weak in this country is because we have taken the power out of the political parties and given too much authority to the primary process. Maybe some people don't like the concept of party bosses in smoke-filled rooms making deals, but you have to understand that political parties play an important role in shaping coalitions and have the structure and experties to pass policies and shape debate. They can organize to get out the vote and moderate the various groups in their party to come to a common agenda. When elected officals are committed to their party platforms, there is a clear direction in what policies will be pursued, and clear accountablility to the voters when their policies produce both good and bad results.
The primary process does not do this. Instead using the resources of the party to form a stable party base, it forces candidates to raise huge sums of money and make ad-hoc coalitions with differing interests groups with the sole goal of getting nominated, and ultimately elected. This also causes elected officials to pander to narrow interests groups and lobbyist and to vote not according to their "professed" party principles, but to the interest of these narrow groups. This is why you have Democrats voting like Republicans, and vice versa. This is why there is generally no party discipline.
Excuse me for the poli-sci lecture, but I bring this up to make a point; the party leadership, regardless of its relative weakness in comparision to othter countries, must still impose some kind of order on a process that is corrupted from interest groups and money. This entire primary calender next year, in my view, is the most undemocratic I've ever seen. Think about this; by front loading the calender so much, It only allows candidates who can raise millions of dollars to compete. It has nothing to do with the message. This is why people like Kucinich, Paul, and Gravel have no chance to compete, regardless of the soundness of the message. It is also too focused on celebrity and not enough on policy. This is why people like Biden and Dodd, who arguably have the most experience and the best policies of any of the other candidates put together, can't get any traction, cuz their not as appealing or charasmatic or interesting as an Obama, Clinton, or Guiliani. Therefore, how can anyone honestly call this process democratic?
I don't wanna sound like a broken record so I'll wrap this up. I am glad the DNC did what it did. This is not about seeing which state should play kingmaker; it's about making a system that is already broken at least somewhat better. I am a Floridian, but I'm glad the DNC stripped us of our delegates. It makes no sense to have some many states going at one time when this contest will be virtually over by the beginning of February. Think smart, people, this is not democratic.

All this points to the flawed cronyism inherent in the primary process. While many would disagree with the idea of states forever leap-frogging forward so as to gain influence, both parties, and possibly eventually the courts or even a Constitutional amendment, needs to establish a system than provides more relevence to all states. Whether this is a rotating system, or some other mechanism, the current one has been long broken.

Way to go, Dems. You make me ashamed to be a registered Democrat. Am I retarded, or wasn't there a huge stink during both of the last two elections about, "Every vote counts?" So this time around, no Democratic vote in Florida or Michigan will count just because the DNC has a bug up their arse about having the nomination hinge on only a few small states. I can't remember the last time I actually had a choice of nominees to vote for here in Pennsylvania.

Way to go DNC.

The DNC made the right decision here. If they decided to not punish Florida and Michigan for moving their primaries way up, it would have almost certainly caused a series of additional states to continue this. Neither Florida nor Michigan thought the DNC would be serious in its threats and now they face the consequences.

The 2012 calendar will certainly be very different from the disaster that 2008's will be, but the New Hampshire primary would have been a month ago if all the other 48 states had their way to get the earliest votes.

AHHHHH YES!

Democracy in action!

You vill all play by our rules and you vill all nominate Frau Clinton when we tell you to. Those that don't vill be dealt with later.

You vill all sign up for Socialist health care ven ve tell you to.

Any questions?

Who cares? The DNC pissed off Michigan voters, and Michigan and Florida are still gonna influence the process by giving tons of momentum to whomever wins.

Go Michigan!

LOL....so typical of the DEMS!! Make everyones vote count etc etc etc etc......Now they are suppressing delegates....nice job you hypocrites!!!

It is sad that an entire party would throw out the rights of suffrage to an entire state, essentially limiting our part in the democratic process. Michigan is always a battleground state, and has gone democratic in the last several elections. I think it is fair to say that the chances of a a democrat in Michigan have been sharply minimized, and as such – the chances for any democratic candidate have been greatly reduced. This is truly outrageous, and an affront to the right of the people to vote and to our political process.

Meanwhile, bad news is accumulating for Clinton as a new poll from New Hampshire (the second in two days) shows her slipping down to single-digits... for the first time since July.

The Dems in the Michigan legislature were warned that the DNC wouldn't allow a change in the date before they voted to hold the early primary. They have no one but themselves to blame for this.

And since Hillary Clinton was the only "major" candidate who didn't have the integrity, to pull her name off the Michigan primary ballot when the DNC first warned that our delegates wouldn't be seated, the confirmation means that she won't get those delegates by default. As far as I'm concerned, as an Obama/Edwards supporter, the DNC's decision is great news.

Typical Dingell and Michigan Democrats. Detroit's the crime capital of American and all they can do is "grandstand" a primary.

Kudos to the DNC for trying to put a damper on this nonsense and that goes for Florida as well. The American voter is sick of this kind of childishness. It's a shame a great state has to have such lousy leadership.

We are at the point in this country where we no longer have a fair electorial process. This will change, maybe not in my lifetime but this will change.

Florida and michigan are another Florida and Iowa this time around. Let's wait and see people how this one will play out!

I meant florida and Ohio during bush and gore/Kerry campaigns. Let's see!

Grand move, Democratic National Committee, for alienating voters from Michigan, a bastion of liberalism for several years. Do you want to lose again? You’re being overconfident; the neoconservative Bush administration has lied and cheated the American people, but their mistakes will not win you the next election. Erase your silly calendar and hear the voice of the people, an ideal you supposedly represent.

Really though, why am I making a fuss? You’re just going to lie to the American people, ignore our health care issues, and neglect educational funding, no matter which party gets put in office. Cheers for debt, servility, and injustice for all!

Canada's starting to look better EVERY SINGLE day.

seems only fair that if they dont count in the primaries they should repay the attitude in the general election .. michigan like florida should just vote for the independents or (shudder) republcan candidates i dont count to you now dont count on me later

Most of the leading Dems are off the ballot in the Michigan primary, having withdrawn their names from the election in support of the DNC's primary calandar. Of the front runners, only Clinton's name remains on the ballot – which makes the primary pretty much useless in determining the Democratic nominee anyway.

Florida and michigan are only two states out of 50 states, so do your math

This is very disappointing. I had been frustrated with the Republicans for willingly sacrificing civil liberties for even the shadow of a security concern. It looks like the democrats are willing to sacrifice the voting process of an entire state for an artificial calendar. It looks like I'll have to pick out a Republican to vote for now. Yuck.

So Typical of the DNC...LOL! So Ridiculous! Keep focusing on things like this idiocy... and the GOP has a SURE FIRE WIN IN 2008!

I agree with there decision. It sets a precedent for other states to follow. As I commented in an earlier ticker, when do we draw the line on these states moving up their primaries? These politicians will no sooner be in office, than assaulting the american airwaves and traveling state to state with their packs of expensive consultants and organizers with important campaign messages and begging for money to pay for their airtime and packs of expensive consultants and organizers for their next term. It's one big vicious circle. Wheres the beef? When will these talking heads have time to actually do their jobs, like reading important bills and legislature,(Like the Patriot Act or Osama bin Laden imminent threat to America ?) CAMPAIGN 2012 in summer 2008. YELLOW MEDIA BLITZKRIEG!

Florida and michigan are another Florida and Iowa this time around. Let's wait and see people how this one will play out!