Demographics & Economics
OMB
Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget
U.S. Census Quickfacts
Inflation Calculator
CIA World Factbook
NationMaster
State Healthcare Facts
UN HDR stats
US Bureau of Economic Analysis
US Bureau of Labor Statistics
US CDC health stats
US DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics
US DOJ crime stats
Constitution
The Constitution
The Founders' Constitution
The Avalon Project
The Federalist Papers
The antifederalist papers
Founding documents
Politics
ADA (liberal) Voting Records
ACU (conservative) Voting Records
Census Voter Turnout
Congressional Research Service
Memeorandum
NOW list of voting scorecards
PolitiFact
PorkBusters
Project VoteSmart list of voting scorecards
RealClearPolitics
Roll call votes--House
Roll call votes--Senate
Survey USA
WaPo Votes Database
Iraq/Terrorism
CentCom
Brookings Institute Iraq Index
Project on Defense Alternatives War Report
Nat'l Defense Univ Iraq
Nat'l Defense Univ Afghanistan
MERLIN, Nat'l Defense Univ Library Network
STRATFOR
Nat'l Memorial Inst for Prevention of Terrorism
West Point's Combating Terrorism Center
Politics blogs
Baldilocks
Blue Mass Group
Cadillac Tight
California Conservative
Jon Chait
Confederate Yankee
Crooked Timber
Democracy Project
Dinocrat
First Read
Gateway Pundit
GenerationPatriot
Horse Race Blog
Just One Minute
Hugh Hewitt
Michelle Malkin
Patterico's Pontifications
Power Line
Red State
RNCC blog
Scrappleface
Sister Toldjah
Talking Points Memo
The Blogometer
The Corner
The Next Right
The Moderate Voice
Think Progress
Wizbang
Moderate / centrist
Ambivablog
Bipartisan Rules
Booker Rising
Centerfield
Charging RINO
Donklephant
Liberal War Journal
Militant Moderates
The Buck Stops Here
The Glittering Eye
The Iconic Midwest
The PoliGazette
The Walrus Said
Legal & academic
How Appealing
Becker-Posner
Bench Memos
Concurring Opinions
Economists Do It With Models
Legalities
Prawfsblawg
SCOTUSblog
Sentencing Law & Policy
UCFB
The Volokh Conspiracy
Christian
Archbp Dolan: Gospel in the Digital Age
Bp Chris Coyne: Let Us Walk Together
ADW blog
Simon Dodd: Motu Proprio
Fr Zuhlsdorf: WDTPRS
Fr Longenecker: Standing On My Head
Elizabeth Scalia: The Anchoress
First Thoughts
Mirror of Justice
Rorate Cæli
Veritas Rex
Middle East & Muslim affairs
Eteraz
Iraq the Model
Lebanese Political Journal
Michael Totten
Michael Yon
General interest
Althouse
Ambiance
Chris Muir's Day by Day
Instapundit
IowaHawk
JAC
Professor Bainbridge
Prettier than Napoleon
Rachel Lucas
The Right Coast
Science Blog
Sippican Cottage
Whatever
Consider the scenario:
On Jan. 29, Florida Republicans and Democrats head to the polls to pick presidential nominees. Republican votes count, just as you would expect, but the results for Democrats would be nonbinding. No delegates would be awarded based upon the results and instead party activists and insiders would decide on some later date how to divvy up the state's more than 200 delegates to the Democratic national convention...
...The confusion springs from the decision by Florida lawmakers to move the state's primary from March to January. The move scrambled the carefully arranged schedule that both national parties had laid out for the primaries, aimed at giving a more diverse group of states say in the early nominating process.
National Democrats have particularly strict penalties for violating the schedule they set. Now they are looking at imposing penalties, including forfeiting any nominating delegates from Florida, that have some in the party worried the Democratic presidential candidates might wind up all but ignoring Florida.
I thought the Dems were dedicated to being sure that every vote in Florida counted, even those of felons and non-citizens. (Except for overseas military votes, of course.) Now it's "Do it our way, or we throw out your votes."
That's one way to further "democracy," I suppose. Cuban-style democracy, that is. Don't say I didn't tell you so months ago...because I TOLD YOU SO, months ago.
Now, tell me one more time about that "party of the people" thing....
Our RSS feed
Gratuitous Democratic Party
Gratuitous Democratic Party bashing, their policy certainly makes sense. Every state wants to be the early state in the primary, and there is a potential serious problem of having a race to be the earliest state. Somebody has to keep some order (whether the national party structures primary process and order makes sense at all is a different point), and there have to be actual sanctions if the policies aren't followed.
LMAO. Gratuitous, my sweet
LMAO. Gratuitous, my sweet party mascot.
Yeah, their policies make sense--for the activists who would disenfranchise Florida voters by taking away their delegates and ignoring their votes. Castro's policies also make sense--for Castro. No party dissent problems there. Works real smooth for them. The party ideal in action, eh?
I love how TELLING THE TRUTH about the party's actions is "bashing." Nope, it's telling the truth. The DNC wants to ignore their own party member's votes in presidential elections. I pointed out months ago what the motivations were, what the predictable results would be if put in practice.
But thank you for supporting the Democratic Party's efforts to disenfranchise their own voters in favor of that old smoke-filled back room, Justin. You're a real credit to democracy! Make every vote count!
Indeed.
I agree, but...
Tully, I certainly agree that the solution is not to empower back-room delegates, but how would you enforce party discipline to provide a sane primary schedule and prevent the race to first which seems to be starting? No state benefits from being last in the selection process, so each individual state has a strong incentive to try to be first or at least very early in the process. What do you think the national parties should do to prevent this? Or do you think it's fine to just let the individual states keep rushing to be first? Leave it up to the candidates as to where they choose to devote their early resources?
I love how TELLING THE TRUTH
I love how TELLING THE TRUTH about the party's actions is "bashing." Nope, it's telling the truth.
Uh, maybe you should go back and read your own post--you write two very brief paragraphs, and one of them compares the Democrats to Castro's Cuba--your post is bashing and not a serious analysis, which is fine, because everyone needs to vent, but you should at least recognize that fact.
The thing that gets me is
The thing that gets me is that for decades, the Democrats set the rules for elections. Now, in Florida, the Republicans set the rules. So, since the Dems had no real choice in the matter, they are going to penalize the voters in their own party who had absolutely no real choice or say in the matter. It would make more sense for the GOP side to be the hardliners on this since it was essentially a GOP push.
In other words, since the Democrats in Florida are too impotent to stop the state GOP in Florida from changing the dates, they are going to penalize all of the Democrats in Florida. What would be even more hilarious is if the delegates are split enough that it comes down to the superdelegates and whatever they decide to do with the Florida delegates. I can only imagine the fun if the candidate who actually wins in Florida misses getting the nomination due to the Florida delegates not being credentialed. Would be like 1968 all over again.
I Think Justin has a point, Tully.
This new primary strategy by the DNC seems silly indeed, and there's an argument as to why involved here, but I think we ride off the rails when we start comparing the Dems to Castro. Let's keep things in balance, and remember Godwin's Law.
"In the world you will find tribulation, but be of good cheer, for I have overcome the world."
John 16:33
I'll concede the Castro
I'll concede the Castro comparison is hyperbolic, but that's it.
The DNC manufactured this mess, front-loading two hand-picked states ahead of others to give their party activists and inside power players more power in manipulating the primaries. I predicted the results at the time, and I was right.
The system they diddled was the one they themselves designed, via the DNC's McGovern Commission, when the grass-rooters were stiffed by back-room dealing in the '68 elections. So now they want to return to the back-room, and stiff the grass-rooters. Heh.
No one made them change up the primary schedules. It's a self-inflicted injury. It's not gratuitous bashing to notice that. And it's still as amusingly ironic as can be, coming from the "Every vote in Florida must count!" crowd.
True enough. I wasn't disputing the facts, so much as I was
criticizing aspects of your rhetoric. As you said, the Castro comparison was hyperbole. Also, as you said, the DNC stepped in it on this one.
"In the world you will find tribulation, but be of good cheer, for I have overcome the world."
John 16:33