Florida is too big, too diverse, and too politically balanced not to play a larger role in the selection of our presidential nominees. The state parties need to stick by their guns on this. The worst that can happen is losing delegates to the party's convention, which is silly since the nominee is determined months in advance.
I'd rather have a real voice in our leader than sending delegates to a glorified coronation.
Friday, August 31, 2007
I hope you can make it. It's embarrassing to have the perpetually corrupt Feeney represent FL-24. Anyways, it's at 400N Edgemon Drive, Winter Springs, FL at 7pm to 9pm at the Civic Center on Sunshine Park.
It's amazing to me because I saw my street featured on Winter Springs on DKos-and a lot of heavy hitters are showing up tonight. (This event is practically right next to my house.) I'll see you there...
Sunday, August 26, 2007
SemDem's diary :: ::
Although Democrats outnumber GOPers 2 to 1 in this state, our legislature is overwhelmingly Republican. (Gerrymandering is a real problem in this state). The main reason the GOP moved our primary date from March to January as opposed to February 5 or 12 is because the DNC has a ridiculous rule that bans primaries before Feb. 5 that the RNC doesn't have. The GOP saw this as an opportunity to not only give Floridains a larger voice (good) but to make problems for the Democrats (not good--but typical).
The GOP legislature has NO INCENTIVE to comply with your demand to move the primary. Don't be stupid.
Your other "suggestion" that we hold a caucus AFTER our primary is even more dumb. Why would anyone vote in the primary? It would mean less than when we had our primary in March. This will disenfrancise our voters--another plus for the GOP.
And so now I awaken with headlines that Democrats will have no delegates to the convention; how the GOP faces "less drastic" sanctions; lawsuits that will be filed by our state party; and editorials on how unfair the DNC is being.
This is not good for us, nor our party.
But let's face it. The ONLY thing the DNC has control over anymore is the convention. A glorified coronation that serves a promotional purpose, but certainly not any real purpose in selecting the nominee. This is all about control, not democracy.
I don't think the ruling will stand. But even so, except for the negative publicity this is generating, I COULDN'T CARE LESS if we send delegates or not. The nominee is always selected MONTHS before the convention. Let someone else play that game.
I'd rather have a real voice. The candidates and the nation aren't stupid enough to ignore Florida. The DNC is only going to exploit their impotence.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
The questions asked were: "Are you a template for the modern GOP?", "How is Hillary flawed?", "Would you apologize to Valerie Plame?", "What are your thoughts on the 2008 election?"
Here's what I would have asked:
SemDem: "What do you mean you were ordered to be here?"
SemDem: "You have said that we can't judge the president now, that history will judge this president. Do you think history will look more favorably on his response to hurricane Katrina?" "How so?"
SemDem: "Do you agree with his decision to appoint a horse-judge as head of FEMA?"
(NO ONE asked about Katrina on any of these shows.)"
SemDem: "After 9/11, our country wanted to unite to fight terrorism. However, you used that tragedy as a tool to demonize your opponents and question their patriotism for disagreeing with the president's policy". (I would have many clips of him to back this up if challenged). "Do you maintain that that was a sensible strategy?"
SemDem: "You have said on your three previous shows that Hillary is unelectable because of her high negatives. Bush has higher negatives than Hillary ever had. Are you saying that if Bush was able to run in 2008, there is no way he would win?" (I would love his tap-dancing, especially since he claims not to follow polls)
SemDem: "The latest National Intelligence Estimate claimed that Al Qaeda is stronger than ever, and that Iraq served as a distraction. How can you claim that keeping our troops in a country to moderate a civil war between the Shiites and the Sunnis, spending $10 billion a month, is helpful in the fight against Al Qaeda?"
There are many other questions I would ask about Bush's complacency in the contractor corruption in Iraq, his role in the Valerie Plame and attorney firing scandal, and his political plans in the future.
These questions are just off the top of my head--and weren't asked. Maybe they were happy that he agreed to talk with them and felt obligated not to make him upset. With the exception of a VERY few questions on MTP, we were cheated. If I wanted to hear a commericial for Bush and the GOP, I'll turn to FOX, thank you very much.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Sorry for the dreary title, and sorry to the diarists who posted this earlier, but this needs FAR MORE attention than it's getting. More so than Guiliani's endless pool of past embarrassments, Romney's money, or McCain's self-destruction.
Please help, please spread the word about the California initiative. In the words of Schwarzeneggar's campaign guy, Steve Schmidt, "it would make it impossible for a Democrat to win the White House!" HE IS RIGHT! Which is why need to start organizing NOW!
A right-wing law firm with very deep pockets are working with GOP reps to steal the election by destroying California's winner-take-all system of electoral votes--they would instead be divided per results in each congressional district. This gives the GOP presidential ticket at least 20 electoral votes (because of safe GOP districts) that it wouldn't get UNDER ANY RULES IN ANY OTHER LARGE STATE.
The major swing states would be mandatory for us to win to have a chance. And lest you think this is all for the good of the people in CA to be represented equally--it's not. It's about the GOP winning. Period. Notice that the GOP is not pushing this on any red state. TEXAS, for example, with a GOP governor and GOP legislature, shuns the idea of dividing their votes that might go to the Democratic ticket. No, it's only OK for the people of California. If this was done nationwide, it would be worth discussing. But ONLY California? There's only one reason...
Here is the problem. I Googled this to try to find some organization or some effort to STOP this, and all I found were complaints about it. I didn't find anything organizing to stop it.
Folks, if we are going to beat this, something needs to start NOW! I know, it sucks. Dems have to work to get their candidates elected, guard the election from vote-tampering, and now, stop shady initatives. But that is our lot in life.
I know many people say "wait and see", that it's not worth the effort because its unconstitutional, or they won't collect enough signatures, etc. WRONG!
If you are waiting for the Bush-packed courts, or the Supreme Court, to do the right thing, you will be sorely disappointed. The redistricting in Texas held, as did the shenanigans in the 2000 election. I can tell you the other side has already organized, started fundraising, and will start getting signatures for the ballot. Procrastinating will not make this go away--it will make it worse.
If anyone can tell me of a link to website or group dedicated to stopping this, please let me know.
There were many ideas given, including:
- Contact AG Jerry Brown and have him declare it unconstitutional: http://ag.ca.gov/initiatives/contact.php
- Supporting counter initiatives, such as one that can be identical but adds the phrase: "but will not take effect until a majority of states have adopted a proportional system"
- Text networks to spread the word at places gathering signatures for the opposition
- Supporting http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/index.php
- Contact the CA Dems, the CA Representatives, organizations like MoveON.org
Let's nip this in the bud. Let's not blow our best chance at a presidential election by ignoring the smoke coming in the cracks.