Question For Democrats Who Live In Florida And Michigan

[Jamilah]

How do you feel about the Democrat party having a convention where 48 states are represented?I understand why your states were excluded but I'd like the perspective of those who live in Florida and Michigan.

[Cilombo]

Our delegates will get counted eventually. Personally I favor the proposal put forth by the Democratic National Committee calling for Michigan and Florida to hold caucuses now, as the votes of Michigan and Florida could be very popular. Michigan has gone ahead and allocated the candidates on the basis of a "55%" victory for Hillary Clinton. I really resent that.  Michigan is an "Open Primary" state and I personally know of many Democrats who either didn't vote because it didn't matter and their candidate was not on the ballot(only Hillary Clinton and Dennis Kucinich were on the ballot) or, they voted in the Republican Primary simply because there was a contest there and McCain has always been popular in Michigan, plus Romney had a connection here by virtue of his father being a former governor. So the argument is that you can't invalidate the votes of the 600,000 who voted in the Michigan Democratic Primary, but how many would have voted if their candidates had been on the ballot? (Edwards and Obama supporters!)  I'm an Obama supporter and I really do not want Hillary Clinton as the nominee.  I say that because that colors my  position in this matter.  But the Democratic National Committee asked all the candidates to sign a pledge that they would not campaign, etc. in any state that didn't abide by the established rules.  All the candidates signed that pledge, and then Michigan and Florida moved their primaries to dates prior to Super Tuesday which was in violation of the DNC rules, so the delegates were taken away.  But Hillary Clinton left her name on the ballot here, while Edwards and Obama did not.  She did some clandestine campaigning in Florida.  She violated the pledge she had signed. To me this whole fiasco is a further confirmation of why Hillary Clinton is just not acceptable to me as the Democratic Candidate.  I would have preferred any of the Democratic Candidates over her, including Mike Gravel. I don't want Hillary Clinton getting 55% of the Michigan Delegates.  She never would have gotten 55% if there had been an actual contest.  So I'd like to see the caucuses take place. And I still wonder how many cross-over votes Hillary Clinton is getting in open primary states.  I think she is getting Republican votes, because the Republicans want to run against her.  She's a polarizing figure with very high negatives.  She is unacceptable to something around 40% of the electorate,  so if her negatives go  up another 10%, she's unelectable. Sources: Personal Opinion Curious2135 71 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[Adebayo]

I live in Florida--> The way it has come down---works for me!

[Sotirios]

architectz said: 1 I live in Florida--> The way it has come down---works for me! 65 months ago

[Coll]

Personally I favor the proposal put forth by the Democratic National Committee calling for Michigan and Florida to hold caucuses now, as the votes of Michigan and Florida could be very popular. Michigan has gone ahead and allocated the candidates on the basis of a "55%" victory for Hillary Clinton. I really resent that.  Michigan is an "Open Primary" state and I personally know of many Democrats who either didn't vote because it didn't matter and their candidate was not on the ballot(only Hillary Clinton and Dennis Kucinich were on the ballot) or, they voted in the Republican Primary simply because there was a contest there and McCain has always been popular in Michigan, plus Romney had a connection here by virtue of his father being a former governor. So the argument is that you can't invalidate the votes of the 600,000 who voted in the Michigan Democratic Primary, but how many would have voted if their candidates had been on the ballot? (Edwards and Obama supporters!)  I'm an Obama supporter and I really do not want Hillary Clinton as the nominee.  I say that because that colors my  position in this matter.  But the Democratic National Committee asked all the candidates to sign a pledge that they would not campaign, etc. in any state that didn't abide by the established rules.  All the candidates signed that pledge, and then Michigan and Florida moved their primaries to dates prior to Super Tuesday which was in violation of the DNC rules, so the delegates were taken away.  But Hillary Clinton left her name on the ballot here, while Edwards and Obama did not.  She did some clandestine campaigning in Florida.  She violated the pledge she had signed. To me this whole fiasco is a further confirmation of why Hillary Clinton is just not acceptable to me as the Democratic Candidate.  I would have preferred any of the Democratic Candidates over her, including Mike Gravel. I don't want Hillary Clinton getting 55% of the Michigan Delegates.  She never would have gotten 55% if there had been an actual contest.  So I'd like to see the caucuses take place. And I still wonder how many cross-over votes Hillary Clinton is getting in open primary states.  I think she is getting Republican votes, because the Republicans want to run against her.  She's a polarizing figure with very high negatives.  She is unacceptable to something around 40% of the electorate,  so if her negatives go  up another 10%, she's unelectable.