MI: “I was very disappointed as a clerk and as a Michigan taxpayer that I am running an election where nobody is elected … and the taxpayers are paying $10 million to run it for the political parties,”
All their hard work for what? All of the Republican candidates will be listed on the ballot and only one Democratic side, …Hillary Clinton.
How does Michigan get rewarded for this? Democrats strip Michigan of all delegates to the National Convention next year. This is their punishment.
So let me clarify all of this for you. It is okay for the Democrats to disenfranchise a voter. They don’t want to talk about diversity when it comes to picking candidates..they want to stick to the two least diverse states as the deciders. Howard Dean can be thanked for that. If there is a gay in the room, a rainbow has been formed and he can call it diversity. Never mind all the Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans etc., that won’t be represented. Iowa and New Hampshire will be first.
Granholm and the Democrats of Michigan need to answer for this as well. Granholm knew what she was doing but allowed our state to waste money that it can not afford to, all in the name of Clinton.
What does this mean for the Republican Primary? Well, we can expect the Democrats to be voting on the Republican ballots in order to tilt the election to their favor..
As Toasted Tofu Says:
I think this whole mess is awesome! Our primary system is so antiquated and badly in need of reform that all this state leap-frogging is going to force the issue.
Next spring, I don’t even know why I’ll bother voting in the Ohio Primary– the nominee will have already been decided by the time I get a change to weigh in.
There really is no need to vote by the time spring rolls around. Your candidate could have been knocked out in Iowa. The way this played out in MI, Dean came out ahead, letting everyone know that he is not changing anything, and those that challenge him will pay.
Allahpundit gives his take on the Virginia Primary, which had the Republicans wanted voters to take a loyalty pledge:
Would Democrats have been allowed to vote in a GOP primary held a week later if they’d already voted in the Democratic primary a week before? Presumably not. In which case, how is it better to have them voting on the same day? They’ve got to choose which primary they want to vote in, and since they’re already planning on going to the polls that day, it’s a simple matter of a ballot switch when they get there. The smart thing would have been to reschedule the GOP primary for a week later and let the Democratic primary voters disqualify themselves on the 12th. The turnout would give you a sense of how many Dems and independents might be holding back and waiting to vote in the GOP primary instead.
Money is a big factor here. These primaries cost states a ton of money. In theory, he is correct, but in practical terms, this just doesn’t work.
Michigan does not have party registration, so Democrats and Independents could still participate in the Republican Primary, if they so chose. What have they got to lose? A vote? They get no say on their ticket, so what’s to stop them from screwing up the republican primary?
What was that about disenfranchising voters, stealing elections and culture of corruption?
