Is this constitutional?

Don’t see how it can’t be. It’s a private organization (DNC), and they have rules and by-laws. Don’t follow the rules and by-laws, and you are penalized.

I feel for the Floridians, though… their date was moved by a GOP-controlled state legislature, in a “game-the-system” play.
.

It’s a situation where government and political party cross jurisdictions. The DNC may be a private organization but they depend on states to pay for and handle everything about the elections themselves. The Democratic Party cannot compel a state government to do anything.

The Democratic Party cannot compel a state government to do anything.

They can’t, but as a private organization, they can choose to not incorporate the state’s activities into their own. In other words, they can’t tell a state, “you HAVE to hold your primary on this date,” but they can say “we won’t consider your results unless you hold it on this date.” There’s no constitutional right to vote in a primary. Despite the facts that state funds are generally used (and it’s a completely separate discussion about whether they should be), primaries are essentially elections being held for private organizations, and therefore those organizations can pretty much set up the rules however they want.

All that said, I don’t think the Democratic Party should have cut Michigan and Florida out. It’s not the decision that I’d have made, however, now that it’s done, I’m not sure I see a fair way to count the votes from those people, short of redoing the entire primaries there (and that is questionable).

there were candidates (OK, only one that counts, but still) who played by the rules and didn’t campaign there or have their name on the ballot.

You Obama shill, woman hater

The party can do whatever the party wants. There is no constitutional right to have a say in who a political party nominates. If they wanted to not hold primaries, like the good ole days, they could. If after all of this, they decided to nominate the Holy One, Al Gore, High Priest of Global Warming, they could. Primaries are not elections, they are primaries.

” … It represents Michigan and Florida ….”

Umm … dood, hate to tell you this, but that’s not what I was told MIFL means ….

Glen, If my tax money is spent in the process, I’m involved.

Neither the donkeys nor the elephants say anything about the delegates being officially committed to anyone at all. It is technically all out in the open but they can do whatever they want at the convention, as you say. They’re paying for that. But if they use my tax dollars, that’s something else.

Also, I believe Mr. Edwards might have still been running at that point, so although I could be a woman hater it doesn’t make me a shill, just a pill.

SB, you’re thinking MILF. I made an innuendo.

Jim, I think SB just trick you into admitting your familiarity with that term. Of course I have no idea what it means myself.

SB, you’re thinking MILF. I made an innuendo.

Oh! Well, if you say so. As Glen pointed out, I have no idea what that term means myself. I’ve just, you know, “heard things” on “the tubes.” But really, I’m far too innocent to say one way or ‘t’other.

Ginger may know what it means so she can inform the innocents among us. She was twittering about it the other day.

it must be interesting though - When I google it I get a lot of pages that work won’t let display so I’m still not sure either…..

Yeah okay.

Jim V.:

As of yesterday, Donna Brazile was saying that, “Yeah, Florida and Michigan’s delegates won’t be seated, unless of course the Rules Committee (which she sits on) has a change of mind about it on May 30th” or something close to that. In other words, maybe somebody’s fingers are crossed.

Hey I know what MILF means, I used to have several of them a week, sometimes as many as two or three in a single day. But that was before my faculties started going to hell. Now instead of MILF (Moments I’d Like to Forget) I have DILR (Days I’d Like to Remember.

The ironic thing is, had Florida and Michigan done what they were supposed to and held later primaries, they still would have mattered and gotten lots of attention. Look how much attention was lavished on North Carolina and Indiana.

And you really can’t blame Florida on the Republicans, the Florida Democratic party went right along with it. The DNC actually offered to pay for their primary if they’d do it on a later date from the Republicans, but they refused.

I do think they’ll work out some sort of deal–either split the delegates, have them get half-votes, something like that. Michigan they can’t count “as is,” if Obama wasn’t even on the ballot.

DC,

“MILF”- I do not think it means what you think it means.

And as far as the MIFL situation is concerned, I think it’s pretty ridiculous that the state level leaders of the Democratic party allowed their primaries to be held when they were, which it was clearly understood would result in their votes being discounted. Not to mention Hillary deciding to campaign in both states after her and Obama agreed not to, that was pretty funny.

Democrats have only themselves to blame for this current mess.

Democrats have only themselves to blame for this current mess.

Except for Florida, of course. The GOP-controlled state lege advanced the date. Mischief-makers.
.

Tman:

It doesn’t? damn.

That the DNC and the state parties screwed the pooch is without a doubt. I truly wish there was a viable third party, but then again I never find the pony no matter how much horseshit I shovel through.